Fwd: limma 2.2.0 - decideTests heirarch/nestedF + BH correction , small bug
0
0
Entering edit mode
@gordon-smyth
Last seen 27 minutes ago
WEHI, Melbourne, Australia
Dear Ariel, James MacDonald has pointed out to me that I still didn't get this quite right. Hopefully the treatment of adjust="BH" is finally correct now in limma 2.4.4. >To: "Ariel Chernomoretz" <ariel.chernomoretz at="" crchul.ulaval.ca=""> >From: Gordon Smyth <smyth at="" wehi.edu.au=""> >Subject: [BioC] limma 2.2.0 - decideTests heirarch/nestedF + BH correction >, small bug >Cc: Bioconductor >Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 14:51:34 +1100 > >>[BioC] limma 2.2.0 - decideTests heirarch/nestedF + BH correction , small bug >>Ariel Chernomoretz ariel.chernomoretz at crchul.ulaval.ca >>Wed Nov 23 16:55:20 CET 2005 >> >>Hi, >> >>I think I found a small bug in decideTests >>when heirarchical or nestedF methods are selected in conjunction with >>adjust.method="BH" (the new default value). >> >>In both cases there is a problem with the 'switch' command. You're right. >> In adjust heirarchical: >> 51 a <- switch(adjust.method, >> 52 none=1, >> 53 bonferroni=1/n, >> 54 holm=1/(n-i+1), >> 55 BH,fdr=i/n <------- >> BH=i/n,fdr=i/n >> 56 ) > >This is not a bug. It is a legal R short-hand for what you have written. Oops. For this to be legal R code, I needed "BH=, fdr=1/n". In other words, I forgot one of the "=" signs. >>In adjust nestedF: >> 65 a <- switch(adjust.method, >> 66 none=1, >> 67 bonferroni=1/n, >> 68 holm=1/(n-i+1), >> 69 fdr=i/n <------- >> BH=i/n,fdr=i/n >> 70 ) > >On the other hand, this is a bug. It has been fixed already in limma >2.3.6, but thanks for reporting it anyway. Unfortunately the bug is still >in Bioconductor release 1.7, but the easy work-around is just to use "fdr" >instead of "BH". My so-called fix in limma 2.3.6, actually repeated the same bug as for adjust="heirarchical". Both of these should now be correct in limma 2.4.4. Sorry for the confusion. Thanks again for reporting the bug. Cheers Gordon >>btw, the p.adjust function of statmod package makes no distinction >>between BH >>and fdr methods, why introduce such distinction in limma? (or am I missing >>something?) > >limma does the same as p.adjust. It treats "fdr" and "BH" as the same, but >has to accept either as input. > >Best wishes >Gordon > >>regards, and thanks for an excellent tool! >> >>Ariel./ >> >> >>-- >>Ariel Chernomoretz, Ph.D. >>Centre de recherche du CHUL >>2705 Blv Laurier, bloc T-367 >>Sainte-Foy, Qc >>G1V 4G2 >>(418)-525-4444 ext 46339
limma limma • 694 views
ADD COMMENT

Login before adding your answer.

Traffic: 916 users visited in the last hour
Help About
FAQ
Access RSS
API
Stats

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.

Powered by the version 2.3.6