FDR analyses: minimum number of features

  Two thoughts on this:

  1.  Your FDR (Not Franklin Delano Roosevelt) sounds like another name 
for Type I error rate. 

It is certainly not the same as type I error rate. Type I error rate is 
the proportion of true
nulls which are rejected, while the FDR is the proportion of rejected 
null hypothesis
which really are true nulls!

To me FDR seems like a more promising avenue to multiple testing than 
the old
"familywise error rate". Who knows what is a family?

Kjetil
The definition of "reasonably reliable FDRs" 
would seem to relate to the status of the literature on this issue among 
researchers in genotyping.  As more reports of FRDs in genotyping are 
published, I would expect that methodology for estimation and the 
standard for accuracy would similarly evolve.

  2.  Have you tried the Bioconductor (www.bioconductor.org/) 
listserve?  They might be able to say something more useful than a 
general list like this.

  spencer graves

Dupont, William wrote:

Dear List,

We are planning a genotyping study to be analyzed using false discovery
rates (FDRs) (See Storey and Tibshirani PNAS 2003; 100:9440-5).  I am
interested in learning if there is any consensus as to how many
features (ie. how many P values) need to be studied before reasonably
reliable FDRs can be derived.  Does anyone know of a citation where
this is discussed?

Bill Dupont 

William D. Dupont          phone: 615-343-4100          URL
http://biostat.mc.vanderbilt.edu/twiki/bin/view/Main/WilliamDupont

______________________________________________
R-help at stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide! http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html

-- 

Kjetil Halvorsen.

Peace is the most effective weapon of mass construction.
               --  Mahdi Elmandjra
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.

FDR analyses: minimum number of features

Thread (3 messages)