[phenixbb] observed reflections error?

[Nathaniel Echols]

On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 3:55 AM, MARTYN SYMMONS <
martainn_oshiomains at btinternet.com> wrote:

> I guess one stumbling block is authors worried that people will second
> guess their space group assignment - but what you suggest is a good
> compromise on the road to full deposition of raw data.
>

I doubt that's really an issue; for as long as authors have been required
to deposit (merged) structure factors, there has always been the
possibility that everyone else can second-guess some of the details of
their structure.  In fact, one of my colleagues wrote an entire paper on
incorrect space group assignments:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20445225

And of course we have the multiple retractions that could not have happened
without access to the data; it is generally agreed that this is a good
thing.  Most of us instinctively appreciate that if our data can't endure
detailed inspection by random colleagues, they probably shouldn't be
published anyway.

The bigger problem, right now, is that PDB deposition is still an
unpleasant experience and there is no standard mechanism for including
unmerged data.

-Nat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://phenix-online.org/pipermail/phenixbb/attachments/20140228/41868b79/attachment.htm>