Saturday, November 10, 2007

Idiots look at Data, Part VI: Mid Graph

In Part V, we tried to grade IS regions. In Part VI, we look at the mid-graph regions of interest. Again, the idea is to count things that look like they might be possible problems, namely:

  • shoulders on a peak of interest
  • leading or trailing edge on a peak of interest.
  • connection to neighbor above apparent baseline.
  • neighbor within one peak width
This is not intended to be a definitive count, just a sense of what might be going on and in need of a second look.

As before, click on an image for bigger. For the most part, these are scaled 2x as wide as tall.

[MORE]




ucla: Shoulders 2, edges 1, connect 0, neighbors 0.



ex92: shoulders 1, edges 1, connect 2, neighbors 1




ex88: shoulders 2, edges 0, connect 2, neighbors 3





ex90: shoulders 1, edges 0, connect 2, neighbors 2




ex86: shoulders 2, edges 0, connect 2, neighbors 2




usada173: shoulders 2, edges 1, connect 2, neighbors 2



usada349: shoulders 2, edges 1, connect 2, neighbors 2



ex87: shoulders 1, edges 1, connect 2, neighbors 2



ex84: shoulders 1, edges 1, connect 2, neighbors 2



ex93: shoulders 1, edges 1, connect 2, neighbors 2



ex85: shoulders 1, edges 2, connect 2, neighbors 2



ex89: shoulders 1, edges 1, connect 2, neighbors 2



s3a: complete co-elution of 5aB and 5bA; shoulders 1, edges 1, connect 2, neighbors 4.



s3b: shoulders 0, edges 1, connect 2, neighbors 1



Assesment



Test
shoulders
leading
or
trailing
edge
connect
above
baseline
neighbors
within

one

peak
total
UCLA
2
1 0
0
3
Ex 92 3-Jul
1
1 2
1
5
Ex 88 13-Jul
2
0
2
3
7
Ex 90 14-Jul
1
0
2
2
5
Ex 86
2
0
2
2
6
USADA 173 20-Jul
2
1
2
2
7
USADA 349 20-Jul
2
1
2
2
7
Ex 87 22-Jul
1
1
2
2
6
Ex 84 23-Jul
1
1
2
2
6
Ex 93 control
1
1
2
2
6
Ex 85 control
1
2
2
2
7
Ex 89 control
1
1
2
2
6
Shackleton top
1
1
2
4
8
Shackleton bottom
0
1
2
1
4

2 comments:

Cub said...

Here are some dumb questions that I haven't been able to figure out.

In most of these graphs there appears to be two plots. The plot with the highest peaks is in the background and the plot with the lowest peaks in the foreground. The area under the foreground plot is opaque and obscures the baseline of the background plot.

A good example is Ex 86 Landis F3. The bottom of the peak labled 22 (and many others) is hidden behind the foreground plot.

So what is this foreground plot? Why isn't it in the graphs from Shackelton or UCLA? How do we know what the baseline of the background plot looks like, since it's obscured by the foreground plot?

And in the case of the Ex 86 Landis F3 graph mentioned above (and a few others), why is there a long linear ramp at the beginning of the foreground plot. This looks very unnatural and appears to be some kind of error.

Cub said...

Never mind. I think I get it now.

LNDD apparently asks the software to calculate the baseline and plot it on the graph. The algorithm uses a threhsold so that any peak below the threshold is considered part of the baseline.

The graphs from the USADA and Shackelton don't plot the baseline.

At least that's one explanation for what I'm seeing in the graphs.

I still think the ramp at the beginning of some of these plots looks like an instrument problem.