Dear Amit, 

I should sort all the spectrum-peptide matching in one raw file by e-value 
from low to high, than cut the FDR?
Am I right?
Thank you very much.

On Friday, March 29, 2013 12:26:06 PM UTC+8, Amit Kumar Yadav wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Interpretation of e-values will always be coupled to the database size 
> (more appropriately, the size of candidates for a particular spectrum). So, 
> I do not think it is the correct metric for controlling false positives.
>
> When the authors had suggested using e-values, I believe FDR was not in 
> use (much). But after it was necessary to control for global error rates, 
> Target-Decoy may be your best option. In my experience, e-values are better 
> normalized/calibrated ( i don't know what is the right term for this) to 
> spectrum to spectrum variations than hyperscore, it is better to use 
> e-values than hyperscore for FDR calculation. Hyperscore have more 
> variations and suffer from peptide length bias.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> *Amit Kumar Yadav *
> Senior Research Fellow (SRF-CSIR)
> IGIB, New Delhi (India)
>
> *MassWiz Web server* <http://masswiz.igib.res.in>
> * <http://masswiz.igib.res.in>**MassWiz sourceforge 
> project*<https://sourceforge.net/projects/masswiz>
> * 
> <https://sourceforge.net/projects/masswiz>**MassWiki*<https://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/masswiz/index.php?title=MassWiki>
>  
>
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Hanice Sun <[email protected]<javascript:>
> > wrote:
>
>> I am considering using target-decoy FDR or directly using E-value of 
>> x!tandem?
>>
>> It seems that xtandem author recommend the latter.
>>
>> *(*
>> *This reference describes the idea of using reversed sequences to 
>> validated large collections of protein identifications. The GPM has this 
>> method built-in as a possible method for validation.*
>> *N.B.: We strongly recommend that you do not use this type of method for 
>> any purpose other than comparison with other search engines. The "decoy" 
>> search methods that have been developed from this manuscript are deeply 
>> flawed algorithms for determining the confidence of peptide identification 
>> assignments.*
>> *)*
>>
>>
>> However,
>>
>> 1.    If I use E-value, I don't know which threshold should I set. 
>> Although I tried to understand E-value, I still cant know which value is 
>> suitable.
>>
>> At the beginning , I thought maybe I could set it as 1e-3, but I found 
>> the default E-value of blast is 10, and this paper uses 100 (
>> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18216375). 
>>
>> So I dare not set this threshold. 
>>
>> 2. If  I choose the target-decoy strategy, I don't know which value 
>> should I use to sort the matching, could I use hyper-score?
>>
>> Could anyone help me? thank you very much.
>>
>> ps. My database is relatively large , It may affect the choice.
>>
>>  -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "spctools-discuss" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to [email protected] <javascript:>.
>> To post to this group, send email to 
>> [email protected]<javascript:>
>> .
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/spctools-discuss?hl=en
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>  
>>  
>>
>
>

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


Reply via email to