Jaclyn taroni/2023 02 19 edits

[jaclyn-taroni]

Stacked on #238

Summarizing changes:

• Changed Box 3 to follow one sentence per line convention. There are a couple minor changes in there as well.
• Removed reference to complex phenotypes and complex data from the synopsis. I also changed our reference to "large amounts of complex data" because it was somewhat imprecise.
• Fixed the Figure 1 legend per reviewer's comments.
• Revised a bunch of language in Box 1 per reviewer's comments (e.g., "held-out test set" becomes "held-out validation set").
• Added a TODO about updating the LASSO reference.

I'd like to take another look at Box 3 tomorrow, so I'm marking as a draft for now.

[jaybee84]

@jaclyn-taroni Thanks for starting this draft.

I was just taking a look at the changes, and it looks like a bunch of changes that I had already made in the original (word doc) did not port correctly to the PR .. e.g.

Removed reference to complex phenotypes and complex data from the synopsis. I also changed our reference to "large amounts of complex data" because it was somewhat imprecise.
Fixed the Figure 1 legend per reviewer's comments.
Revised a bunch of language in Box 1 per reviewer's comments (e.g., "held-out test set" becomes "held-out validation set").

Thanks for going through those and fixing/updating those. Looking forward to your finalized changes.

[jaclyn-taroni]

I'm going to mark this ready for review for the benefit of running the other checks. Edit: That's not the issue, it's that I'm targeting a branch other than the default branch.

[jaclyn-taroni]

Okay, with c03e152, I made a few tweaks to where the new box (Box 1) is referenced. Some references seemed too low context given what the sentenced around them actually said – a reader is unlikely to be familiar with the papers cited – so I've either removed something or made it clear it was an example by adding e.g.,.

[jaybee84]

added some minor comments. otherwise look good to me..

[jaybee84]

@jaclyn-taroni I see that you did not make any changes to the outlook.md file where we refered to the excluded methods. Is it okay to assume that you did not have any additional edits there?

[jaclyn-taroni]

@jaclyn-taroni I see that you did not make any changes to the outlook.md file where we refered to the excluded methods. Is it okay to assume that you did not have any additional edits there?

Yes, no additional edits.