MAS 5.0
1
0
Entering edit mode
@helene-boucher-163
Last seen 9.6 years ago
I tried expresso to reproduce expression measures from MAS 5.0 but I get a slight difference from Affymetrix as illustrated on a set of 3 chips for selected probe sets. Any idea why that is? The version of Unix we have is SunOS Release 5.8. Thanks, Helene 100001_at 29.6222834908728 10.2880336221679 80.7973366171763 100002_at 9.94107964466495 62.9653009129815 53.7356175596969 100003_at 2262.85860839992 1539.08193903367 1910.0212276237 100004_at 305.100816246875 188.181043441888 239.902666074234 100005_at 434.482366404616 638.860562906946 589.86003783735 100006_at 61.9587790672468 32.9005081415387 61.5914892307955 100007_at 890.772109484179 988.46987085589 1076.17589775836 100009_r_at 89.4108950323307 46.1650654835421 54.0252748779586 100010_at 227.251880233698 401.164278682326 424.746403324436 100011_at 1157.66237359318 702.613181714498 882.033123210299 100012_at 893.256638440421 1511.96440725101 2054.18415149103 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- 100001_at 16 16 26.0 A 0.781017 100002_at 16 16 10.2 A 0.910595 100003_at 16 16 2271.8 P 0.000219 100004_at 16 16 302.2 P 0.004863 100005_at 16 16 439.1 P 0.006532 100006_at 16 16 63.5 A 0.358690 100007_at 16 16 894.7 P 0.001354 100009_r_at 16 16 90.2 P 0.000805 100010_at 16 16 227.4 P 0.009985 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------- 100001_at 16 16 11.0 A 0.602006 100002_at 16 16 58.8 A 0.438361 100003_at 16 16 1545.5 P 0.000219 100004_at 16 16 191.7 P 0.011447 100005_at 16 16 641.4 P 0.002617 100006_at 16 16 33.7 A 0.117160 100007_at 16 16 992.9 P 0.001141 100009_r_at 16 16 47.4 P 0.011447 100010_at 16 16 402.6 P 0.001354 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------- 100001_at 16 16 81.1 A 0.438361 100002_at 16 16 44.4 A 0.581931 100003_at 16 16 1917.2 P 0.000219 100004_at 16 16 244.2 P 0.031336 100005_at 16 16 591.0 P 0.001354 100006_at 16 16 62.9 A 0.089405 100007_at 16 16 1080.6 P 0.000673 100009_r_at 16 16 54.5 P 0.011447 100010_at 16 16 428.1 P 0.000959 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------
• 828 views
ADD COMMENT
0
Entering edit mode
@wilkinson-mark-124
Last seen 9.6 years ago
This issue in general has kept me somewhat reluctant to use the affy package. To the affy package authors: is the idea for affy to reproduce the functionality of MAS 5.0 (at least for some parts)? In other words, should I be able to do probe level summaries exactly like MAS5, or is affy's version just a close approximation? Mark Wilkinson Informatics Analyst St. Jude Children's Research Hospital Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences The opinions expressed here are my own and do not necessarily represent those of St. Jude Children's Research Hospital. -----Original Message----- From: Helene Boucher [mailto:bouhel01@borabora.crchul.ulaval.ca] Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 10:09 AM To: bioconductor@stat.math.ethz.ch Subject: [BioC] MAS 5.0 I tried expresso to reproduce expression measures from MAS 5.0 but I get a slight difference from Affymetrix as illustrated on a set of 3 chips for selected probe sets. Any idea why that is? The version of Unix we have is SunOS Release 5.8. Thanks, Helene 100001_at 29.6222834908728 10.2880336221679 80.7973366171763 100002_at 9.94107964466495 62.9653009129815 53.7356175596969 100003_at 2262.85860839992 1539.08193903367 1910.0212276237 100004_at 305.100816246875 188.181043441888 239.902666074234 100005_at 434.482366404616 638.860562906946 589.86003783735 100006_at 61.9587790672468 32.9005081415387 61.5914892307955 100007_at 890.772109484179 988.46987085589 1076.17589775836 100009_r_at 89.4108950323307 46.1650654835421 54.0252748779586 100010_at 227.251880233698 401.164278682326 424.746403324436 100011_at 1157.66237359318 702.613181714498 882.033123210299 100012_at 893.256638440421 1511.96440725101 2054.18415149103 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ -------- 100001_at 16 16 26.0 A 0.781017 100002_at 16 16 10.2 A 0.910595 100003_at 16 16 2271.8 P 0.000219 100004_at 16 16 302.2 P 0.004863 100005_at 16 16 439.1 P 0.006532 100006_at 16 16 63.5 A 0.358690 100007_at 16 16 894.7 P 0.001354 100009_r_at 16 16 90.2 P 0.000805 100010_at 16 16 227.4 P 0.009985 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ --------- 100001_at 16 16 11.0 A 0.602006 100002_at 16 16 58.8 A 0.438361 100003_at 16 16 1545.5 P 0.000219 100004_at 16 16 191.7 P 0.011447 100005_at 16 16 641.4 P 0.002617 100006_at 16 16 33.7 A 0.117160 100007_at 16 16 992.9 P 0.001141 100009_r_at 16 16 47.4 P 0.011447 100010_at 16 16 402.6 P 0.001354 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ --------- 100001_at 16 16 81.1 A 0.438361 100002_at 16 16 44.4 A 0.581931 100003_at 16 16 1917.2 P 0.000219 100004_at 16 16 244.2 P 0.031336 100005_at 16 16 591.0 P 0.001354 100006_at 16 16 62.9 A 0.089405 100007_at 16 16 1080.6 P 0.000673 100009_r_at 16 16 54.5 P 0.011447 100010_at 16 16 428.1 P 0.000959 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ -------- _______________________________________________ Bioconductor mailing list Bioconductor@stat.math.ethz.ch http://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioconductor
ADD COMMENT
0
Entering edit mode
The MAS 5.0 implementation is based upon availiable documentation. Clearly it might be impossible to completely duplicate Affymetrix, since there are pieces of their documentation that are left a little vague. Ben On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, Wilkinson, Mark wrote: > > This issue in general has kept me somewhat reluctant to use the affy > package. > > To the affy package authors: is the idea for affy to reproduce the > functionality of MAS 5.0 (at least for some parts)? In other words, should > I be able to do probe level summaries exactly like MAS5, or is affy's > version just a close approximation? > > > > Mark Wilkinson > Informatics Analyst > St. Jude Children's Research Hospital > Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences > > The opinions expressed here are my own and do not necessarily represent > those of St. Jude Children's Research Hospital. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Helene Boucher [mailto:bouhel01@borabora.crchul.ulaval.ca] > Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 10:09 AM > To: bioconductor@stat.math.ethz.ch > Subject: [BioC] MAS 5.0 > > > > I tried expresso to reproduce expression measures from MAS 5.0 but I get a > slight > difference from Affymetrix as illustrated on a set of 3 chips for selected > probe > sets. Any idea why that is? The version of Unix we have is SunOS Release > 5.8. > > Thanks, > > Helene > > > 100001_at 29.6222834908728 10.2880336221679 > 80.7973366171763 > 100002_at 9.94107964466495 62.9653009129815 > 53.7356175596969 > 100003_at 2262.85860839992 1539.08193903367 > 1910.0212276237 > 100004_at 305.100816246875 188.181043441888 > 239.902666074234 > 100005_at 434.482366404616 638.860562906946 > 589.86003783735 > 100006_at 61.9587790672468 32.9005081415387 > 61.5914892307955 > 100007_at 890.772109484179 988.46987085589 1076.17589775836 > 100009_r_at 89.4108950323307 46.1650654835421 > 54.0252748779586 > 100010_at 227.251880233698 401.164278682326 > 424.746403324436 > 100011_at 1157.66237359318 702.613181714498 > 882.033123210299 > 100012_at 893.256638440421 1511.96440725101 > 2054.18415149103 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- > -------- > > > 100001_at 16 16 26.0 A 0.781017 > > > > 100002_at 16 16 10.2 A 0.910595 > > > > 100003_at 16 16 2271.8 P 0.000219 > > > > 100004_at 16 16 302.2 P 0.004863 > > > > 100005_at 16 16 439.1 P 0.006532 > > > > 100006_at 16 16 63.5 A 0.358690 > > > > 100007_at 16 16 894.7 P 0.001354 > > > > 100009_r_at 16 16 90.2 P 0.000805 > > > > 100010_at 16 16 227.4 P 0.009985 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- > --------- > 100001_at 16 16 11.0 A 0.602006 > > > > 100002_at 16 16 58.8 A 0.438361 > > > > 100003_at 16 16 1545.5 P 0.000219 > > > > 100004_at 16 16 191.7 P 0.011447 > > > > 100005_at 16 16 641.4 P 0.002617 > > > > 100006_at 16 16 33.7 A 0.117160 > > > > 100007_at 16 16 992.9 P 0.001141 > > > > 100009_r_at 16 16 47.4 P 0.011447 > > > > 100010_at 16 16 402.6 P 0.001354 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- > --------- > 100001_at 16 16 81.1 A 0.438361 > > > > 100002_at 16 16 44.4 A 0.581931 > > > > 100003_at 16 16 1917.2 P 0.000219 > > > > 100004_at 16 16 244.2 P 0.031336 > > > > 100005_at 16 16 591.0 P 0.001354 > > > > 100006_at 16 16 62.9 A 0.089405 > > > > 100007_at 16 16 1080.6 P 0.000673 > > > > 100009_r_at 16 16 54.5 P 0.011447 > > > > 100010_at 16 16 428.1 P 0.000959 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- > -------- > > _______________________________________________ > Bioconductor mailing list > Bioconductor@stat.math.ethz.ch > http://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioconductor > > _______________________________________________ > Bioconductor mailing list > Bioconductor@stat.math.ethz.ch > http://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioconductor >
ADD REPLY
0
Entering edit mode
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 12:58:00PM -0600, Wilkinson, Mark wrote: > > This issue in general has kept me somewhat reluctant to use the affy > package. > > To the affy package authors: is the idea for affy to reproduce the > functionality of MAS 5.0 (at least for some parts)? In other words, should > I be able to do probe level summaries exactly like MAS5, or is affy's > version just a close approximation? As stated, the implementation was done reading the Affymetrix "white paper" (available on the website of the company). The algorithms are doing what is claimed to be done (or at least what we understood to be done -- the source is open, we hope to correct errors as fast as they are reported ...). >From what I see in the data enclosed the difference between is roughly 1-2% between both implementations. I also see that the number from the MAS output are rounded, which would make one think that the differences have to do with truncation/rounding during the different steps. Effort was made to avoid that but the following may make you react. In 'pmcorrect.rma', I initially set the default parameter 'delta' to '2^-20' (as it is written in the specs, page 8). The default for delta is currently 2e-20 (I think the fix was suggested to obtain results similar to MAS 5.0, Rafael may want correct me on that). Are the specs or the code of MAS 5.0 right ? You are free to trust better MAS 5.0. Hopin' it helps, Laurent > > > > Mark Wilkinson > Informatics Analyst > St. Jude Children's Research Hospital > Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences > > The opinions expressed here are my own and do not necessarily represent > those of St. Jude Children's Research Hospital. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Helene Boucher [mailto:bouhel01@borabora.crchul.ulaval.ca] > Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 10:09 AM > To: bioconductor@stat.math.ethz.ch > Subject: [BioC] MAS 5.0 > > > > I tried expresso to reproduce expression measures from MAS 5.0 but I get a > slight > difference from Affymetrix as illustrated on a set of 3 chips for selected > probe > sets. Any idea why that is? The version of Unix we have is SunOS Release > 5.8. > > Thanks, > > Helene > > > 100001_at 29.6222834908728 10.2880336221679 > 80.7973366171763 > 100002_at 9.94107964466495 62.9653009129815 > 53.7356175596969 > 100003_at 2262.85860839992 1539.08193903367 > 1910.0212276237 > 100004_at 305.100816246875 188.181043441888 > 239.902666074234 > 100005_at 434.482366404616 638.860562906946 > 589.86003783735 > 100006_at 61.9587790672468 32.9005081415387 > 61.5914892307955 > 100007_at 890.772109484179 988.46987085589 1076.17589775836 > 100009_r_at 89.4108950323307 46.1650654835421 > 54.0252748779586 > 100010_at 227.251880233698 401.164278682326 > 424.746403324436 > 100011_at 1157.66237359318 702.613181714498 > 882.033123210299 > 100012_at 893.256638440421 1511.96440725101 > 2054.18415149103 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- > -------- > > > 100001_at 16 16 26.0 A 0.781017 > > > > 100002_at 16 16 10.2 A 0.910595 > > > > 100003_at 16 16 2271.8 P 0.000219 > > > > 100004_at 16 16 302.2 P 0.004863 > > > > 100005_at 16 16 439.1 P 0.006532 > > > > 100006_at 16 16 63.5 A 0.358690 > > > > 100007_at 16 16 894.7 P 0.001354 > > > > 100009_r_at 16 16 90.2 P 0.000805 > > > > 100010_at 16 16 227.4 P 0.009985 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- > --------- > 100001_at 16 16 11.0 A 0.602006 > > > > 100002_at 16 16 58.8 A 0.438361 > > > > 100003_at 16 16 1545.5 P 0.000219 > > > > 100004_at 16 16 191.7 P 0.011447 > > > > 100005_at 16 16 641.4 P 0.002617 > > > > 100006_at 16 16 33.7 A 0.117160 > > > > 100007_at 16 16 992.9 P 0.001141 > > > > 100009_r_at 16 16 47.4 P 0.011447 > > > > 100010_at 16 16 402.6 P 0.001354 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- > --------- > 100001_at 16 16 81.1 A 0.438361 > > > > 100002_at 16 16 44.4 A 0.581931 > > > > 100003_at 16 16 1917.2 P 0.000219 > > > > 100004_at 16 16 244.2 P 0.031336 > > > > 100005_at 16 16 591.0 P 0.001354 > > > > 100006_at 16 16 62.9 A 0.089405 > > > > 100007_at 16 16 1080.6 P 0.000673 > > > > 100009_r_at 16 16 54.5 P 0.011447 > > > > 100010_at 16 16 428.1 P 0.000959 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- > -------- > > _______________________________________________ > Bioconductor mailing list > Bioconductor@stat.math.ethz.ch > http://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioconductor > > _______________________________________________ > Bioconductor mailing list > Bioconductor@stat.math.ethz.ch > http://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioconductor
ADD REPLY

Login before adding your answer.

Traffic: 633 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