szpiech
commented
1 year ago Hello,
At some point I switched the calculation to report log10(ihh1/ihh0) instead of ln(ihh1/ihh0). Hope this helps.
Zachary
Le jeu. 16 mars 2023 à 9:46 AM, BioInf2305 @.***> a écrit :
After running the selscan v1.2.0 (installed using bioconda) and selscan v.2.0.0, I noticed the difference in unstandardized iHS.
output of iHS using v.2.0.0
locus17 28092 0.222222 9.89167e-05 0.000200533 -0.306916 locus19 28100 0.333333 0.000347033 0.000290924 0.0765913 locus20 28134 0.0555556 3.3e-05 0.000207401 -0.798296 locus21 28166 0.444444 0.000546821 0.000364689 0.175923 locus23 28213 0.222222 0.000453917 0.000244137 0.269342 locus29 28268 0.277778 0.0031815 0.00080166 0.598642 locus30 28287 0.5 0.0112939 0.000955875 1.07244 locus31 28290 0.5 0.0112939 0.000955875 1.07244 locus32 28298 0.5 0.000955875 0.0112939 -1.07244 locus33 28325 0.5 0.000955875 0.0112939 -1.07244
output of iHS using v.1.2.0 locus17 28092 0.222222 9.89167e-05 0.000200533 -0.706701 locus19 28100 0.333333 0.000347033 0.000290924 0.176358 locus20 28134 0.0555556 3.3e-05 0.000207401 -1.83815 locus21 28166 0.444444 0.000546821 0.000364689 0.405078 locus23 28213 0.222222 0.000453917 0.000244137 0.620183 locus29 28268 0.277778 0.0031815 0.00080166 1.37842 locus30 28287 0.5 0.0112939 0.000955875 2.46939 locus31 28290 0.5 0.0112939 0.000955875 2.46939 locus32 28298 0.5 0.000955875 0.0112939 -2.46939 locus33 28325 0.5 0.000955875 0.0112939 -2.46939
As it can be seen that while ihh1 and ihh0 remains the same in both the case, the final ratio differs between the two versions. Can you help me understand why the output is different? I thank you in advance.
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/szpiech/selscan/issues/94, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABAKRQUCCTOCEBMA7PYIGDTW4MKS3ANCNFSM6AAAAAAV5HQ6UE . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>
BioInf2305
After running the selscan v1.2.0 (installed using bioconda) and selscan v.2.0.0, I noticed the difference in unstandardized iHS.
output of iHS using v.2.0.0
locus17 28092 0.222222 9.89167e-05 0.000200533 -0.306916 locus19 28100 0.333333 0.000347033 0.000290924 0.0765913 locus20 28134 0.0555556 3.3e-05 0.000207401 -0.798296 locus21 28166 0.444444 0.000546821 0.000364689 0.175923 locus23 28213 0.222222 0.000453917 0.000244137 0.269342 locus29 28268 0.277778 0.0031815 0.00080166 0.598642 locus30 28287 0.5 0.0112939 0.000955875 1.07244 locus31 28290 0.5 0.0112939 0.000955875 1.07244 locus32 28298 0.5 0.000955875 0.0112939 -1.07244 locus33 28325 0.5 0.000955875 0.0112939 -1.07244
output of iHS using v.1.2.0 locus17 28092 0.222222 9.89167e-05 0.000200533 -0.706701 locus19 28100 0.333333 0.000347033 0.000290924 0.176358 locus20 28134 0.0555556 3.3e-05 0.000207401 -1.83815 locus21 28166 0.444444 0.000546821 0.000364689 0.405078 locus23 28213 0.222222 0.000453917 0.000244137 0.620183 locus29 28268 0.277778 0.0031815 0.00080166 1.37842 locus30 28287 0.5 0.0112939 0.000955875 2.46939 locus31 28290 0.5 0.0112939 0.000955875 2.46939 locus32 28298 0.5 0.000955875 0.0112939 -2.46939 locus33 28325 0.5 0.000955875 0.0112939 -2.46939
As it can be seen that while ihh1 and ihh0 remains the same in both the case, the final ratio differs between the two versions. Can you help me understand why the output is different? I thank you in advance.