stephens999
commented
4 years ago Do you have the latest version of ashr? This problem should be fixed in latest version.
On Tue, Aug 11, 2020, 10:34 arider2 notifications@github.com wrote:
Hi,
When I run get_lfsr on my mash analysis I see some negative local false sign rates. Does this indicate some mistake by me or is their a meaning to these?
See below in the first column:
x <- getlfsr(m2) colnames(x) <- c(1:ncol(x)) rownames(x) <- c(1:nrow(x)) rownames(x) <- paste0("effect",rownames(x)) colnames(x) <- paste0("con_",colnames(x)) y <- as.data.frame(x) y <- y[order(y$con_1, decreasing = F),] y[1:5, 1:5] con_1 con_2 con_3 con_4 con_5 effect_9 -2.220446e-16 0 -2.220446e-16 -2.220446e-16 6.01097e-07 effect_10 -2.220446e-16 0 -2.220446e-16 -2.220446e-16 6.01097e-07 effect_11 -2.220446e-16 0 -2.220446e-16 -2.220446e-16 6.01097e-07 effect_12 -2.220446e-16 0 -2.220446e-16 -2.220446e-16 6.01097e-07 effect_13 -2.220446e-16 0 -2.220446e-16 -2.220446e-16 6.01097e-07
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/stephenslab/mashr/issues/84, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AANXRRIWHVVHSI2AR5B5JJ3SAFQIRANCNFSM4P3FQB6A .
arider2
Hi,
When I run get_lfsr on my mash analysis I see some negative local false sign rates. Does this indicate some mistake by me or is their a meaning to these?
See below in the first column:
x <- get_lfsr(m2)(x) <- c(1:ncol(x))(x) <- c(1:nrow(x))rownames(x) <- paste0("effect_",rownames(x))colnames(x) <- paste0("con_",colnames(x))y <- as.data.frame(x)y <- y[order(y$con_1, decreasing = F),]y[1:5, 1:5]con_1 con_2 con_3 con_4 con_5 effect_9 -2.220446e-16 0 -2.220446e-16 -2.220446e-16 6.01097e-07 effect_10 -2.220446e-16 0 -2.220446e-16 -2.220446e-16 6.01097e-07 effect_11 -2.220446e-16 0 -2.220446e-16 -2.220446e-16 6.01097e-07 effect_12 -2.220446e-16 0 -2.220446e-16 -2.220446e-16 6.01097e-07 effect_13 -2.220446e-16 0 -2.220446e-16 -2.220446e-16 6.01097e-07