2,684
edits
CC1/2: Difference between revisions
value of CC1/2 at a resolution where the signal vanishes
No edit summary |
(value of CC1/2 at a resolution where the signal vanishes) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== number of reflection pairs == | |||
[[CORRECT.LP]] and XSCALE.LP do not explicitly state the ''number of reflection pairs'' that were used to calculated CC1/2.. | [[CORRECT.LP]] and XSCALE.LP do not explicitly state the ''number of reflection pairs'' that were used to calculated CC1/2.. | ||
| Line 4: | Line 6: | ||
The ''number of reflections pairs'' that were used for the CC1/2 calculation can therefore be obtained as follows: Y-Z gives the number of unique reflections that have a single observation. The remaining (X-Y+Z) unique reflections have multiple observations, i.e. there were (X-Y+Z) reflection pairs that went into CC1/2. | The ''number of reflections pairs'' that were used for the CC1/2 calculation can therefore be obtained as follows: Y-Z gives the number of unique reflections that have a single observation. The remaining (X-Y+Z) unique reflections have multiple observations, i.e. there were (X-Y+Z) reflection pairs that went into CC1/2. | ||
== value of CC1/2 at a resolution where the signal vanishes == | |||
At a resolution where the signal vanishes, CC1/2 should be around zero. However, empirically we sometimes see negative values of CC1/2 (to values down to around -0.4) when using sftools or phenix.cc_star for calculating it. On the other hand, CC1/2 as printed out in CORRECT.LP does approach zero. How can this be understood? | |||
The reason is that CORRECT does "alien" rejection (as documented in [[CORRECT.LP]]) ''after'' the final statistics table is printed. "Aliens" are reflections that are much stronger than should be expected in their resolution range, e.g. ice reflections. These reflections are identified in the following way: the average intensity in a resolution range is calculated. Any (acentric) reflection whose intensity is larger than 10 times the average is suspicious/unexpected; it is printed out at the bottom of CORRECT.LP (for centrics, the criterion is a bit different). By default, the parameter REJECT_ALIENS has a value of 20, which means that those reflections with intensity > 20*average are marked as aliens (outliers), and are disregarded in downstream processing (e.g. [[XDSCONV]]). | |||
In a resolution shell where the noise is much stronger than the signal (empirically, if <I/sigma> is less than 0.2), many reflections are considered as aliens - those where the noise happens to be strongly positive. If these are rejected (i.e. if the default REJECT_ALIEN is applied) then the average intensity becomes negative. | |||
In addition, CC1/2 becomes negative as can be seen in a simulation employing random numbers that are normally distributed with an average of zero and a variance of one. In the figure, each reflection is represented at a location determined by the intensities of its subset intensities. Reflections with intensity>1 are rejected (red crosses), whereas reflections with intensity<1 are used for calculating CC1/2 (green). The magenta line divides the plot into reflections with positive (total) intensity (upper right) and negative (total) intensity (lower left). The blue line is a least-squares fit to the "green" reflections; the correlation coefficient is -0.3. | |||
[[File:Reject_aliens.png]] | |||