Fast and robust group-wise eQTL mapping using sparse graphical models

BMC Bioinformatics

Table 2 Pairwise comparison of different models using cis -enrichment and trans -enrichment in yeast

*cis* -enrichment		FaST-LMM	C of Model 2	MTLasso2G	B × A of Model 1	LORS	Lasso
	C+B×A of Model 2	0.4351	<0.0001	<0.0001	<0.0001	<0.0001	<0.0001
	FaST-LMM	-	0.2351	<0.0001	<0.0001	<0.0001	<0.0001
	Cof Model 2	-	-	0.0221	<0.0001	<0.0001	<0.0001
	MTLasso2G	-	-	-	<0.0001	<0.0001	<0.0001
	B×Aof Model 1	-	-	-	-	<0.0001	<0.0001
	LORS	-	-	-	-	-	0.0052
trans-enrichment		B×A of Model 2	FaST-LMM	MTLasso2G	LORS	B×A of Model 1	Lasso
	C+B×A of Model 2	0.4245	0.3123	0.0034	0.0029	0.0027	0.0023
	B×A of Model 2	-	0.3213	0.0132	0.0031	0.0028	0.0026
	FaST-LMM	-	-	0.0148	0.0033	0.0031	0.0029
	MTLasso2G	-	-	-	0.0038	0.0037	0.0032
	LORS	-	-	-	-	0.0974	0.0151
	B×Aof Model 1	-	-	-	-	-	0.0564

A p-value shows how significant a method on the left column outperforms a method in the top row in terms of cis-enrichment or trans-enrichment.

ISSN: 1471-2105