{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02066590126291619, 'fraction_numerical': 0.018369690011481057, 'mean_word_length': 5.0979020979020975, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison of evidence for linkage from different analytic methods

In a randomly chosen replicate of extended pedigrees from GAW10, we conducted robust multipoint genome scans for linkage using a dense marker map. For analysis of the quantitative traits, we selected sibships from the pedigrees, and for analysis of disease status, small families of affected relatives were selected. Lod‐score likelihood analyses were conducted in the full pedigrees and in the affected relative families for selected regions. We located a flanking marker for MG1 on chromosome 5, and identified marker regions including MG2, MG4, and MG5 on chromosomes 8 and 9. The analytic methods were consistent for the major gene with a strong effect; false positive errors on chromosomes 1 and 10 could have been eliminated by requiring evidence from more than one method. © 1997 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.