pafonine at lbl.gov
Sat Jul 17 14:37:58 PDT 2010
After thinking on this some more (thanks jetlag), I believe I have a
(relatively clean) solution in mind. It will take me 3-5 days to
implement, so I will do it once I have those spare 3-5 days. The upper
limit for the sum of occupancies of present conformers will be
determined automatically and it will set individually (per involved
residue group - ensemble of conformers) as constraint target for the
sum. Thanks Ed for stimulating discussion -:) I'm sure once it's
available this will raise another waive of questions like "why the sum
of occupancies of my alternative conformers is not 1?" .
On 7/16/10 10:28 AM, Nathaniel Echols wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Ed Pozharski <epozh001 at umaryland.edu
> <mailto:epozh001 at umaryland.edu>> wrote:
> But nothing will prevent the sum of the two occupancies to exceed 1,
> right? But this may work in some cases.
> Good point - the additive effect of the conformers probably wouldn't
> be considered, so both would be refined to something like the total
> phenixbb mailing list
> phenixbb at phenix-online.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the phenixbb