-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 47
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
susie_rss gives different results using different R #132
Comments
In susie_rss documentation, R is a p by p correlation matrix, so you should use the correlation matrix. If you multiply R by 3201, the z scores should multiply by sqrt(3201) to get the same result. |
@zeping where is this documentation that you quoted (which seems to be out
of date)
A p by p symmetric, positive semidefinite matrix.
It can be X'X, the covariance matrix X'X/(n-1), or a correlation matrix.
It should be estimated from the same samples used to compute bhat and shat.
Using an out-of-sample matrix may produce unreliable results.
…On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 2:25 PM Yuxin Zou ***@***.***> wrote:
In susie_rss documentation, R is a p by p correlation matrix, so you
should use the correlation matrix. If you multiply R by 3201, the z scores
should multiply by sqrt(3201) to get the same result.
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#132 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AANXRROWESZLMQOPW4W33JDTVNVRNANCNFSM47S5WWXQ>
.
|
@stephens999 It is in |
Hi, I'm using version "0.11.43" of susieR and found that documentation in |
The documentation you quoted is for |
@zouyuxin so in |
In |
Hello,
I've been trying to run
susie_rss
using different R matrices.The first version I used is the correlation matrix of genotype count from a reference panel. Part of which looks like:
In this way I did not need to scale or center the count matrix, because
cor
gives the same output. The result makes much sense to me:I also saw in package documentation that the
R
option can be:So the second matrix I used is
t(geno) %*% geno
, wheregeno
is the nxp matrix of counts that is centered and scaled. The matrix looks like this:This matrix only differs from the first one by a factor of
3201
, as I have 3202 individuals in the 1KG reference panel. So I expected the result fromsusie_rss
would be the same as before. However, using this matrix I got no CS and PIP is flat.I'm wondering what can lead to such huge difference in PIP when the
R
is very similar. Should I just use the correlation matrix that is directly calculated from genotype matrix?Thanks so much!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: