PMC

Upper left panel: Schizophrenia empirical conditional mean of split-half replication z-scores (purple line) and fitted effect sizes from scale mixture of normals model (yellow line). Lower left panel: Schizophrenia empirical conditional variance of split-half replication z-scores (purple line) and fitted variances from scale mixture of normals model (yellow line). Upper right panel: Crohn’s disease empirical conditional mean of split-half replication z-scores (purple line) and fitted effect sizes from scale mixture of normals model (yellow line). Lower right panel: Crohn’s disease empirical conditional variance of split-half replication z-scores (purple line) and fitted variances from scale mixture of normals model (yellow line).

Admixture Dynamics of European and African Ancestry in African Americans
For the CGF model, the case in which Europeans continually served as genetic donor was considered as CGF1 model, whereas Africans as genetic donor was considered as CGF2 model. To find the model that fits the empirical distribution best, earth mover’s distance (EMD) between empirical data and that of each model was calculated. The model showing the lowest EMD with the empirical data was considered best fit.
(A) Distribution of EMDs for African ancestral component between empirical data and each model.
(B) Empirical distribution of CSDA length for African ancestral component and simulated distributions when the number of generations was set to 14.
(C) Distribution of EMDs for European ancestral component between empirical data and each model.
(D) Empirical distribution of CSDA length for European ancestral component and the simulated distributions when the number of generations was set to 14.

Calibration of acceptance rates after external peer review and rejection rates after in-house review. Empirical cumulative distribution functions of a acceptance rates after external peer review for empirical and simulated data (single run). The model output fits the empirical distribution [Anderson–Darling p values (0.63–0.73) in all runs] and b rejection rates after in-house review for empirical and simulated data (single run). The model output fits the empirical distribution [Anderson–Darling p values (0.068, 0.152) in all runs]

A) Surface plot of ratio of autophosphorylation predicted by the Empirical model and by Model 1. B) Surface plot of ratio of autophosphorylation predicted by Model 2 and by Model 1. In A and B Contour lines for 1, 5, and 60 sec reaction times are shown in light gray. C) Ca²⁺-dependence of the ratio of autophosphorylation predicted by the Empirical model and Model 1 at 1, 5, and 60 sec reaction times. D) Same as C for ratio of autophosphorylation predicted by Model 2 and Model 1.