Closed drserajames closed 2 years ago
I think that's what it currently does, i.e. takes the distance between the base antigen coordinate and the coordinate in the procrustes transformed version, then does the rmsd on those, or am I missing something?
It is doing rmsd on the distances. But, to me at least, it makes more sense to do rmsd on the positions aka means of the distances. The rmsd on the positions is what is minimised with a procrustes. What do you gain by doing rmsd on the distances? The distances are already all positive by definition.
I think I still don't quite follow, could you write some example code that describes your alternative approach? I think the rmsd calculated currently is the same as what is being minimised by the procrustes but perhaps I am missing something.
You're completely correct. I always thought procrustes was minimising the sum of the procrustes distance, not its square.
Sorry!
The output from
procrustesData
is calculated incorrectly for"ag_rmsd"
,"sr_rmsd"
and"total_rmsd"
. The rmsd should be the rmsd of the positions (i.e the mean of the procrustes distances), not the rmsd of distances.