Talk:Genome-wide complex trait analysis

This article was nominated for deletion on 2 December 2018. The result of the discussion was keep.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Genetics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Speedy deletion nomination of GCTA[edit]

You may also wish to consider using the the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on GCTA requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

Obviously, I object. GCTA is an important and commonly used genetics technique despite only being introduced in 2010, which, as widely agreed, has simultaneously ended the long acrimonious debate over heritability estimates are biased and also solved the missing heritability problem. It's bizarre that there wasn't a GCTA article already. --Gwern (contribs) 03:14 23 May 2016 (GMT)

Why on Earth is this marked for deletion? Impressive work, Gwern. --71.50.63.56 (talk) 10:02, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not in fact about "a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content", and does in fact indicate how and why the subject is notable. I don't see any actual sign on the page or in its history that it actually *has* been tagged for speedy deletion, though -- is someone just messing around here? Gareth McCaughan (talk) 12:36, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The articles name was changed, perhaps that got rid of it. --71.50.63.56 (talk) 13:38, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I saw it before the name change, and the deletion warning was there on the talk page but there was no other sign that the article had been so tagged. Some griefer faking it on the talk page? No matter now I guess. RichardKennaway (talk) 16:54, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Acronyms[edit]

Could the GREML acronym be expanded? Google gave me two different expansions, but I don't know enough to make an edit myself. The link on the REML part does not seem close enough to the subject of the present article to be informative. RichardKennaway (talk) 16:58, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I understand it, that's the right link. The GCTA package doesn't use maximum likelihood as the target for optimizing parameters, but restricted maximum likelihood; see the mentions in https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3014363/ . (Some papers mention issues with parameters escaping to infinity or large values, which might be connected.) I mentioned it as part of the name because given the GCTA package's multiple functionalities, some writers seem to have a convention where 'GCTA' might refer to any of the additional functionalities like bivariate genetic correlations, and only when they write 'GCTA GREML' or 'GREML' do they mean the core 'infer heritability from SNPs/phenotypes' functionality. --Gwern (contribs) 18:06 23 May 2016 (GMT)

Disadvantages[edit]

In the disadvantages section, the computational complexity disadvantage is not clear. Is that asymptotic notation describing the time complexity or the memory? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.135.76.3 (talk) 20:54, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]