similar to: p.adjust.Rd sugggestion

The Partek package (www.partek.com) allows only two selections for Multiple Test Correction: Bonferroni and Dunn-Sidak. Can anyone suggest why Partek implemented Dunn-Sidak and not the other methods that R has? Is there any particular advantage to the Dunn-Sidak method? R knows about these methods (in R 2.1.1): > p.adjust.methods [1] "holm" "hochberg" "hommel"

Hello, I am not sure about the p.adjust( , fdr). How do these adjusted p-values get? I have read papers of BH method. For independent case, we compare the ordered p-values with the alfa*i/m, where m is the number of tests. But I have checked that result based on the adjusted p-values is different with that by using the independent case method. Then how do the result of p.adjust( , fdr) come? And

You asked the same question on the Bioconductor mailing list back in August. At that time, you suggested yourself a solution for how the adjusted p-values should be interpreted. I answered your query and told you that your interpretation was correct. So I'm not sure what more can be said, except that you should read the article Wright (1992), which is cited in the help entry for p.adjust(),

I append below a suggested update for p.adjust(). 1. A new method "yh" for control of FDR is included which is valid for any dependency structure. Reference is Benjamini, Y., and Yekutieli, D. (2001). The control of the false discovery rate in multiple testing under dependency. Annals of Statistics 29, 1165-1188. 2. I've re-named the "fdr" method to "bh" but

Dear R contributors, I suggest adding a new method to `p.adjust` ("Adjust P-values for Multiple Comparisons", https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/stats/html/p.adjust.html). This new method is published in Benjamini, Krieger, Yekutieli 2016 Adaptive linear step-up procedures that control the false discovery rate (Biometrika). https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/93.3.491 This paper

I am posting this to both R and BioC communities because I believe there is a lot of confusion on this topic in both communities (having searched the mail archives of both) and I am hoping that someone will have information that can be shared with both communities. I have seen countless questions on the BioC list regarding limma (Bioconductor) and its calculation of FDR. Some of them involved

I am posting this to both R and BioC communities because I believe there is a lot of confusion on this topic in both communities (having searched the mail archives of both) and I am hoping that someone will have information that can be shared with both communities. I have seen countless questions on the BioC list regarding limma (Bioconductor) and its calculation of FDR. Some of them involved

Hi, There is a question that I am confused. I have a set of data like this: hsa-miR-205--GATA3 0.797882767 1.08E-13 hsa-miR-205--ITGB4 0.750217593 1.85E-11 hsa-miR-187--PGF 0.797604155 3.24E-11 hsa-miR-205--SERPINB5 0.744124886 3.28E-11 hsa-miR-205--PBX1 0.734487224 7.89E-11 hsa-miR-205--MCC 0.72499934 1.80E-10 hsa-miR-205--WNT5B 0.717705259 3.33E-10 hsa-miR-200c--PKN2 0.721746815

Mark, there is a fdr website link via Yoav Benjamini's homepage which is: http://www.math.tau.ac.il/%7Eroee/index.htm On it you can download an S-Plus function (under the downloads link) which calculates the false discovery rate threshold alpha level using stepup, stepdown, dependence methods etc. Some changes are required to the plotting code when porting it to R. I removed the

Hi, I have two questions want to ask. 1. If I have a matrix like this, and I want to figure out the rows whose value in the 3rd column are less than 0.05. How can I do it with R. hsa-let-7a--MBTD1 0.528239197 2.41E-05 hsa-let-7a--APOBEC1 0.507869409 5.51E-05 hsa-let-7a--PAPOLA 0.470451884 0.000221774 hsa-let-7a--NF2 0.469280186 0.000231065 hsa-let-7a--SLC17A5

Hola a todos, Tengo un pequeño problemilla... Tengo unas 9000 variables que he contrastado con 1 en concreto con el test de wilcoxon. He calculado el p-valor, y queria corregirlo con el permutation-based FDR. He encontrado una funcion con R comp.fdr()que hace esta corrección, pero te pide que le pongas las variables con las observaciones y te hace el test (según he entendido). Yo solo quiero

The literanger package is no longer passing on CRAN (https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=literanger) due to array-bound warnings in GCC 13.3 and 14.2 (more details below). This _looks_ to me like one of either a) a compiler bug, b) a false positive, or c) (very unlikely) something in the standard library implementation. Have others seen warnings like this recently, and if so, what have you done

On 5/9/25 03:09, Stephen Wade wrote: > The literanger package is no longer passing on CRAN > (https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=literanger) due to array-bound > warnings in GCC 13.3 and 14.2 (more details below). > > This _looks_ to me like one of either a) a compiler bug, b) a false > positive, or c) (very unlikely) something in the standard library > implementation. >

Hi all, I am having a problem with the function "p.adjust" in stats. I have looked at the manuals and searched the R site, but didn't get anything that seems directly relevant. Can anybody throw any light on it or confirm my suspicion that this might be a bug? I am trying to use the p.adjust() function to do Benjamini/Hochberg FDR control on a vector of p-values that are the

Hello, I've a question about the fdr method in p.adjust: What is the threshold of the FDR, and is it possible to change this threshold? As I understand the FDR (please correct) it adjusts the p-values so that for less than N% (say the cutoff is 25%) of the alternative hypothesis the Null is in fact true. thanks a lot for help, +regards, Arne

Full_Name: Ludo Pagie Version: 2.8.1 OS: linux Submission from: (NULL) (194.171.7.39) p.adjust in stats seems to have a bug in handling n>length(p) for (at least) the methods 'holm' and 'hochberg'. For method 'holm' the relevant code: i <- 1:n o <- order(p) ro <- order(o) pmin(1, cummax((n - i + 1) * p[o]))[ro] where p is the

Hi- Is anyone working on multiple comparisons of means or post-hoc tests (ie: Tukey, Bonferroni) for R? I saw in the winter 98' archives of the R mailing lists that these tests had not been implemented yet, I was just wondering if I could look foward to having them. ;-) I also looked through the contributed packages and didn't see anything that offered such tests. I guess I could check

Hello, I am trying to use the p.adjust function for multiple testing. here is what i have 9997 201674_s_at 0.327547396 9998 221013_s_at 0.834211067 9999 221685_s_at 0.185099475 I import them from excel have have the gene symbol as well as the pvalue here is the issue > pa<-p.adjust(pt,method="BH") Error in p[nna] : object is not

Matt, Here's a Bonferroni-corrected multiple one-sample t-test that I wrote some years ago. It took a while to get it into R, as na.omit doesn't seem to handle vectors and I had to write a quick kludge (na.remove). Another more general point was that I discovered that the help page for t.test gives the name "parameters" for the degrees of freedom, as in S. However, the name

L.S. Since some time there is a new r-project.org site as announced here: https://stat.ethz.ch/pipermail/r-announce/2015/000581.html The logo has changed on the site, but I fail to find a vector graphics file. For the previous logo I used to go to https://svn.r-project.org/R-dev-web/trunk/Logo/ Is there anything similar for the new logo? Many thanks in advance. Kind regards, Tobias --