Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Questions about the output #2

Open
TinaShi opened this issue May 30, 2017 · 4 comments
Open

Questions about the output #2

TinaShi opened this issue May 30, 2017 · 4 comments

Comments

@TinaShi
Copy link

TinaShi commented May 30, 2017

Thanks for your help with the code. For the annotation file in the samples folder, after running 100,000 iterations with max model size == 100, I get an output as below.
screen shot 2017-05-30 at 2 03 07 pm
Here I have two more questions about the output.
The first model contains main effects -1;1;33;73;523. What does the "-1" mean here?
Second, why does all the log-likelihood equal to 0 for this case? It looks a little strange to me. Do you still remember the possible reasons that lead to this result?

@gchen98
Copy link
Owner

gchen98 commented May 30, 2017 via email

@TinaShi
Copy link
Author

TinaShi commented May 30, 2017

Hi, Thanks for the information. I notice that in the endophynote dataset you used logistic regression, while in the annotation dataset the logistic regression is suppressed, since the phenotype dataset contains a continuous variable, I suppose you have used a linear regression here. In the step(2) of the appendix of your paper, you specified the log likelihood function (A1) for logistic regression, I suppose we need to change the formula when we use linear regression instead. Since we need this value in step (8) formula (A9). I think you probably have provided the formula for linear regression as well, we just need to show it when logistic is set to be false in the pima.xml. I do not think the 0 values are used later on, otherwise (A9) is undefined when the denominator is 0, and I was not able to get the chain going.

These are all my guesses, please let me know if you can provide more insight on this topic. I will also learn more about your code to understand it better.

@TinaShi
Copy link
Author

TinaShi commented May 31, 2017

Hello, my last guess is not right. I just noticed a strange pattern, that is the output files for beta and prior variances are all 0! It starts to show this pattern from the first model. I think it might have something to do with logistic regression, but I am not sure.

@TinaShi
Copy link
Author

TinaShi commented May 31, 2017

I just tried to simulate binary variables of the same size for annotation dataset and use logistic regression, unfortunately the same problem still exists. I compare the pimsa.xml in annotation and endophenotype, the difference is that use_endoprior is set to be true in endophenotype and marginal_prior is set to be true in the annotation dataset. I suspect the problem exists in the marginal_prior related files.
After searching the file, I notice code like this "if (settings->marginal_prior){logLike = 0;", " if (settings->marginal_prior){
662 //getRandomBetas(ms,currentModel->betas);
663 logL = 0.;"
in pathwaysearch.cpp file. But I do not understand why this is the case. Can you help me to figure it out? I have been stuck on this project for quite some time, my application has the same data properties as your annotation dataset. It will be of great help if you can help fix the problem. Thanks in advance.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants