We also report the asymptotic power at each of the significance levels, determined by computing the non-centrality parameter (equation (A1)) for each set of parameter settings.
In Table 3, we report the simulation power at the 10−3, 10−4, and 10−5 significance levels for each set of parameter settings.
In Table 1, we report the empirical type I error rates at the 0.975, 0.10, 0.05, 0.025, and 0.01 significance levels for each set of parameter settings.
As in Table 1, in Table 2, we report the empirical type I error rates at the 0.10, 0.05, and 0.01 significance levels for each set of parameter settings.
Images were obtained with the same confocal settings for each set of experiments.
The whole process is repeated for all subjects, and the mean values of spiked compounds and false positives retrieved of all subjects are taken and collected for each set of parameter settings.
Figure 3 shows the results of these statistics in all studied cis-regulatory elements for the 19 tissues and cell lines over 17 sequenced strains, for each of settings of k = 50, 40, 30, 20, 10 and 5 bp windows, respectively.
The parameter settings are kept constant for each set of structural configurations.
We present the number of contigs, average contig size (in parentheses), and the number of reads assembled into contigs for each different set of parameter settings.
