Skip to main content
. 2020 Jan 30;106(2):170–187. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2019.12.011

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Comparison of Fine-Mapping Methods on Two Sets of Simulated Loci of 100 Markers and 100 Samples Each

These two sets differ in the variance of the AS phenotype, but with a fixed mean coverage and AS heritability.

(A and D) Inclusion curve at low and high AS variance, respectively (0.6, 0.8 standard allelic deviation). The y axis shows the expected proportion of markers included in the credible set, and the x axis shows the number of selected markers by posterior probability.

(B and E) Distribution of 95% confidence credible set sizes at low and high AS variance, respectively.

(C and F) Proportions of loci with 95% credible set sizes within given thresholds at low and high AS variance, respectively. Thresholds used are 1, 5, 20, 40, 70, and 100 markers.

(G) A per-snp fine-mapping comparison between PLASMA-J and FINEMAP across 500 simulated loci with one causal variant each. The axes denote the posterior log-odds of causality for FINEMAP and PLASMA-J, respectively. The black hexagons represent the joint distribution of all markers, while the red dots represent specifically the causal markers. Univariate histograms for PLASMA-J and FINEMAP are plotted along the margins.