Difference between revisions of "Talk:Sequence-Based Mutation Analysis Hemochromatosis"

From Bioinformatikpedia
Line 2: Line 2:
 
I've tried to keep the DSSP/PsiPred prediction section short as I know you don't like too much "raw output" on the wiki. Is this amount okay with you?^^
 
I've tried to keep the DSSP/PsiPred prediction section short as I know you don't like too much "raw output" on the wiki. Is this amount okay with you?^^
   
*You could have left out the non-relevant rows of the PSSM also. :-P.<br/> No, I think it is very good as it is, nothing to say, really. Maybe a weighting of the methods would improve your results, and I personally think that e.g. the PAM-score is not as significant as a ' proper ' prediction, but I don't have a handy weighting scheme either and understand your decision. Out of curiosity (didn't do it ourselves): How long does SNAP need to make all ~6000 predictions?
+
*You could have left out the non-relevant rows of the PSSM also. :-P.<br/> No, I think it is very good as it is, very little to say, really. The big pictures of the alignment are a little.. overwhelming and there might be redundant sequences in the alignment (hard to check). Maybe a weighting of the methods would improve your results, and I personally think that e.g. the PAM-score is not as significant as a ' proper ' prediction, but I don't have a handy weighting scheme either and understand your decision. Out of curiosity (didn't do it ourselves): How long does SNAP need to make all ~6000 predictions?
  +
  +
*differ in most predictions ''but'' --> differ in most ''except/but for''<br/>The to be analysed mutations are highlighted. --> The mutations to be analysed are highlighted.<br/> I think.
  +
 
[[User:Boidolj|Boidolj]] 18:18, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 
[[User:Boidolj|Boidolj]] 18:18, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:34, 18 June 2012

@PKU (who I think review us this week):
I've tried to keep the DSSP/PsiPred prediction section short as I know you don't like too much "raw output" on the wiki. Is this amount okay with you?^^

  • You could have left out the non-relevant rows of the PSSM also. :-P.
    No, I think it is very good as it is, very little to say, really. The big pictures of the alignment are a little.. overwhelming and there might be redundant sequences in the alignment (hard to check). Maybe a weighting of the methods would improve your results, and I personally think that e.g. the PAM-score is not as significant as a ' proper ' prediction, but I don't have a handy weighting scheme either and understand your decision. Out of curiosity (didn't do it ourselves): How long does SNAP need to make all ~6000 predictions?
  • differ in most predictions but --> differ in most except/but for
    The to be analysed mutations are highlighted. --> The mutations to be analysed are highlighted.
    I think.

Boidolj 18:18, 18 June 2012 (UTC)