{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017876489707475622, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.261016949152542, '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}}
Empirical nonparametric bootstrap strategies in quantitative trait loci mapping: conditioning on the genetic model.

Several nonparametric bootstrap methods are tested to obtain better confidence intervals for the quantitative trait loci (QTL) positions, i.e., with minimal width and unbiased coverage probability. Two selective resampling schemes are proposed as a means of conditioning the bootstrap on the number of genetic factors in our model inferred from the original data. The selection is based on criteria related to the estimated number of genetic factors, and only the retained bootstrapped samples will contribute a value to the empirically estimated distribution of the QTL position estimate. These schemes are compared with a nonselective scheme across a range of simple configurations of one QTL on a one-chromosome genome. In particular, the effect of the chromosome length and the relative position of the QTL are examined for a given experimental power, which determines the confidence interval size. With the test protocol used, it appears that the selective resampling schemes are either unbiased or least biased when the QTL is situated near the middle of the chromosome. When the QTL is closer to one end, the likelihood curve of its position along the chromosome becomes truncated, and the nonselective scheme then performs better inasmuch as the percentage of estimated confidence intervals that actually contain the real QTL's position is closer to expectation. The nonselective method, however, produces larger confidence intervals. Hence, we advocate use of the selective methods, regardless of the QTL position along the chromosome (to reduce confidence interval sizes), but we leave the problem open as to how the method should be altered to take into account the bias of the original estimate of the QTL's position.