Source author record

William Stafford Noble

William Stafford Noble appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Applications Biomolecules Methodology Quantitative Methods

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works

4topics

4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Open graph Browse works

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

preprint2022arXiv

Competition-based control of the false discovery proportion

Recently, Barber and Candès laid the theoretical foundation for a general framework for false discovery rate (FDR) control based on the notion of "knockoffs." A closely related FDR control methodology has long been employed in the analysis of mass spectrometry data, referred to there as "target-decoy competition" (TDC). However, any approach that aims to control the FDR, which is defined as the expected value of the false discovery proportion (FDP), suffers from a problem. Specifically, even when successfully controlling the FDR at level $α$, the FDP in the list of discoveries can significantly exceed $α$. We offer FDP-SD, a new procedure that rigorously controls the FDP in the competition (knockoff / TDC) setup by guaranteeing that the FDP is bounded by $α$ at any desired confidence level. Compared with the just-published general framework of Katsevich and Ramdas, FDP-SD generally delivers more power and often substantially so in simulated as well as real data.

preprint2012arXiv

On the feasibility and utility of exploiting real time database search to improve adaptive peak selection

Rationale: In a shotgun proteomics experiment with data-dependent acquisition, real-time analysis of a precursor scan results in selection of a handful of peaks for subsequent isolation, fragmentation and secondary scanning. This peak selection protocol typically focuses on the most abundant peaks in the precursor scan, while attempting to avoid re-sampling the same m/z values in rapid succession. The protocol does not, however, incorporate analysis of previous fragmentation scans into the peak selection procedure. Methods: In this work, we investigate the feasibility and utility of incorporating analysis of previous fragmentation scans into the peak selection protocol. We demonstrate that real-time identification of fragmentation spectra is feasible in principle, and we investigate, via simulations, several strategies to make use of the resulting peptide identifications during peak selection. Results: Our simulations fail to provide evidence that peptide identifications can provide a large improvement in the total number of peptides identified by a shotgun proteomics experiment. Conclusions: These results are significant because they point out the feasibility of using peptide identifications during peak selection, and because our experiments may provide a starting point for others working in this direction.