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

Effect size in documentation should report cond-ctrl #366

Open
leetaiyi opened this issue Feb 5, 2025 · 1 comment
Open

Effect size in documentation should report cond-ctrl #366

leetaiyi opened this issue Feb 5, 2025 · 1 comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation

Comments

@leetaiyi
Copy link

leetaiyi commented Feb 5, 2025

In your documentation (chapter 1.13), you have:

  -a ${norm_pileup_1}.gz \
  -a ${norm_pileup_2}.gz \
  -b ${tumor_pileup_1}.gz \
  -b ${tumor_pileup_2}.gz \

and I've checked in another issue that you clarified that the effect size is something like prop_a-prop_b, but we generally like using the control as the baseline, so I suggest changing the documentation to the following or calculate it as prop_b-prop_a instead.

  -a ${tumor_pileup_1}.gz \
  -a ${tumor_pileup_2}.gz \
  -b ${norm_pileup_1}.gz \
  -b ${norm_pileup_2}.gz \

I only found this out as I was comparing another method and found that we had inverse correlations.

@ArtRand
Copy link
Contributor

ArtRand commented Feb 6, 2025

Hello @leetaiyi,

Sure, that's not a bad idea. I agree that the docs should be as similar to what other tools to as possible to make it easier to compare.

@ArtRand ArtRand added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Feb 6, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants