Trusted, Bureaucrats
4,223
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Internal links for different softwares.
These will have lots of additional information. This is just a selection of possibly the most useful messages. You will soon see that this is a complicated topic. Note that relax is capable of performing 100% of the functionality of:
* [[Modelfree4 ]] (with or without the Fast-Modelfree GUI interface)
* [[DASHA]]
* [[Tensor2 ]] and* [[DYNAMICS]]
If you play with the optimisation settings you can even find identical results to within machine precision - relax can mimic these other softwares.
=== Recommendation ===
Finally, you will probably find it much easier to spend the 7-8 days collecting data at another field strength than to implement the [[#Protocol|protocol]] in a relax, [[Modelfree4]], or [[DASHA]] script (or via multiple iterations of the GUI programs), as well as study all of the relevant literature to understand all of the types of failures than only occurs with single field strength data. With multiple field strength data you can perform [https://gna.org/users/semor Sebastien Morin's] consistency testing analysis in relax[Morin and Gagné, 2009] (see http://www.nmr-relax.com/manual/Consistency_testing.html). That way you can see if your per-experiment temperature calibration and
per-experiment temperature control techniques have works sufficiently well (http://www.nmr-relax.com/manual/Temperature_control_calibration.html) and if you have used long enough recycle delays. Collecting data at a second field would probably save you significant amounts of time, and has the additional benefit that it would guarantee that the dynamics you see at the end will be real. I cannot emphasize enough how important it is to collect data at multiple fields, most importantly the NOE and R<sub>2</sub> data.
