Hi Jimmy and Bill,
I am sure using EXPECTSCORE in place of the fval has received less
testing for the veracity of its probabilities, something Alexei was
adamant about when I developed the fval for the X! Tandem native
score.  You have to run searches with decoys and look at q-q plots for
this.  Also, Alexei was initially dubious whether PeptideProphet would
work at all on X! Tandem native, because the expect scoring
distribution has a significant left skew, and is far from normal,
which I believe I was able to mitigate somewhat with the variables I
added in the fval.  And, finally, my own ROC plots showed this fval
doing a better job at discriminating between true- and false-positive
hits.

So, go cautiously into throwing that switch, and make your own
estimations of benefit v. cost.

--Brendan

On Sep 16, 9:36 am, Jimmy Eng <[email protected]> wrote:
> Bill,
>
> If you're interested in Tandem's E-value , there is an option that
> David added in a long time ago that allows the Tandem's E-value to be
> used in place of the discriminant function.  The xinteract option to
> invoke this is "-OE".  Looks like this adds "EXPECTSCORE" to the
> PeptideProphetParser command line.
>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 5:52 AM, Brendan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi Bill,
> > I am the one who wrote it several years back.  I derived the fval
> > somewhat by voodoo, using analysis tools I created in CPAS.  It tested
> > quite well, and if anything produces slightly conservative
> > probabilities, where I felt the k-score fval was slightly optimistic
> > in its estimates (but only slightly).  Note that the k-score fval was
> > derived for the scoring function originally published by Keller, et
> > al, before the score was incorporated into X! Tandem, and therefore
> > makes no use of X! Tandem's expect value.
>
> > These fval calculations can be found in <tpproot>/src/Validation/
> > DiscriminateFunction/Tandem (for native scoring) and Comet (for k-
> > score).
>
> > I remember that a peptide length correction (I think sqrt(length)
> > actually) was important in the final native fval.  Because of how
> > aggressively X! Tandem weights the presence of matching ions, a larger
> > peptide is more likely to produce a wider spread between its best and
> > second best score, the key factor in the expectation value.
>
> > Hope that helps.
>
> > --Brendan
>
> > On Sep 15, 2:30 pm, bill <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> If this is not easily available can you direct me to the class/script/
> >> method that creates the xtandem fval?
> >> Thanks,
> >> Bill
>
> >> On Sep 14, 4:16 pm, Bill Nelson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> > Can you please explain how ProteinProphet calculates the fval from the
> >> > xtandem output?
> >> > It doesn't seem to be tracking the xtandem E-value, what else is
> >> > included?
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Bill

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"spctools-discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/spctools-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to