Re: [ccp4bb]: Refmac vs. cns

[<rams@poori.biochem.uiowa.edu>]

***  For details on how to be removed from this list visit the  ***
***          CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk         ***


REfmac Vs CNS.

Since Tasos started it all.

While one can continue work on the relative merits of CNS vs REFMAC, I
think I will focus on what I miss in ARPWARP/REFMAC. arp_warp is terrible
at using NCS.  If you are working with multimeric proteins and at medium
resolutions around 2.5 A, CNS - strict NCS works miracles.  While I can
definitely use REFMAC to refine, dm to average, and manually build one
model and generate the next etc.. would it not be great if arp_warp could
do it. Few people will dispute that 4 fold averaging at 2.5 A produces
better maps than no averaging at ~2.0A.  CNS, simulated annealing and
water picking do an absoltely wonderful job with strict NCS.

Cheers! i am now taking Tasos advice and going out to drink...

Rams.

 -- 
S. Ramaswamy
Department of Biochemistry.
University of Iowa.