Hi Ed ! Thanks for these insights. Optimizing the CSA and bond length would, I think, allow a real better interpretation of dynamics if tested and showed to work perfectly... I hope someone with time and motivation will work on this one day... Cheers ! Séb Edward d'Auvergne wrote: On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Sébastien Morin <sebastien.morin.1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:Hi, I am trying to use the full_analysis.py script for optimizing model m11 to m15 (m1 to m5 with CSA) for a system for which I have datasets at three magnetic fields (500, 600, 800 MHz). The optimization is quite long, but this could be due to the algorithm used. I'll thus try to optimize models with another algorithm and see how it goes...Be careful with these models. Although they exist, they are untested. By untested, think synthetic noisy data covering much of the model-free space to see if you can get the correct CSA values back (for example the grids I used in my two publications listed at http://www.nmr-relax.com/refs.html). The same goes for the bond length optimisation, and the simultaneous CSA and bond length optimisation.I have another problem which is that, for model tm12, I get a lot of warnings of the form 'Mu_too_small.' This warning is related to the Lagrange Multiplier. I get the same exact problem when trying to work with models m21 to m25 and m31 to m35... Why does this happen only for model tm12 (model tm15 optimization has not finished yet) ? Is this issue a problem ? How could I solve it ?This warning is not much of an issue due to the iterative nature of the Method of Multipliers algorithm. It occurs for difficult optimisation problems, but the final result should be very close to the true minimum. I've seen the warning many times before, but it has never resulted in incorrect parameter values as far as I have seen. The warning is nevertheless preserved so that the user can be wary of that model, especially in its interpretation. Regards, Edward |