Table 2.

Power comparison for admixture population at alpha=0.05¹

Design Methods	I				II				III				IV
	FAM 2	CC 3	UN 4	UI 5	FAM	CC	UN	UI	FAM	CC	UN	UI	FAM	CC	UN	UI
RR=1.5
Checkerboard	.005	.003	.005	.017	.008	.003	.007	.026	.006	.012	.023	.047	.012	.003	.009	.037
Diagonal	.002	.003	.006	.013	.004	.001	.003	.013	.003	.008	.012	.027	.004	.001	.005	.016
Upper corner	.000	.001	.004	.008	.001	.001	.003	.008	.001	.006	.009	.015	.003	.002	.005	.016
RR=2.0
Checkerboard	.036	.023	.119	.324	.079	.025	.122	.405	.080	.249	.457	.719	.221	.028	.217	.693
Diagonal	.019	.024	.092	.210	.034	.019	.074	.261	.037	.161	.286	.477	.127	.026	.145	.486
Upper corner	.006	.016	.065	.120	.016	.015	.052	.152	.022	.133	.248	.376	.049	.013	.083	.274
RR=2.5
Checkerboard1	.203	.174	.613	.899	.389	.182	.602	.949	.410	.826	.956	.994	.787	.183	.783	.994
Diagonal	.082	.121	.431	.702	.227	.124	.404	.736	.268	.724	.899	.974	.505	.119	.569	.816
Upper corner	.043	.101	.357	.553	.084	.091	.259	.500	.125	.528	.693	.797	.315	.093	.453	.779
RR=3.0
Checkerboard	.460	.489	.932	.995	.764	.484	.933	.999	.790	.986	1.00	1.00	.973	.491	.987	1.00
Diagonal	.256	.375	.837	.970	.653	.398	.862	.991	.573	.917	.960	.980	.739	.308	.820	.962
Upper corner	.140	.323	.742	.863	.360	.275	.655	.849	.312	.672	.739	.801	.624	.262	.770	.909
Mean power	.104	.138	.350	.473	.218	.135	.331	.491	.219	.435	.524	.601	.363	.127	.404	.582

Notes:

¹Power = the proportion of true models significant at the given significance level in all simulations. Each power in this table is the mean of 25 scenarios, each of which was sampled on allele frequency between 0.05~0.95 and then replicated 500 times.

²FAM for family-based method

³CC for case-control method

⁴UN for unrelated individuals (unbalanced case-control)

⁵UI for unified method