Hi Maoting,
I appreciate your continued feedback on majiq and voila, and I hope I can answer your questions satisfactorily.
-In majiq v2, there was a prior given to annotated junctions, allowing their LSVs to be quantified as if there was a splicing event at that point (annotation is given tiny prior in the calculation), you can see this behavior for 0 read annotated junctions in both v2 and v3. In v2, this same behavior was not applied to annotated introns. The difference between v2 and v3 is that now, introns have this prior in addition to junctions, which will cause many more introns to be quantified with very low PSI in the output.
-For question 2, I see and note the problem with voila. I have determined there is an issue with psi vs multipsi modes when using certain combination of one psi file with many prefixes inside it vs many psi files with one or more prefixes. I am going to add more explicit usage cases/functionality to clear this up as a high priority item. However, in the meantime there is a way to get a functionality similar to v2 (means over multiple experiments):
run $ majiq-v3 psi-coverage ; once for each of your replicates, this will provide four .psicoverage files ; by default, you can run voila with these four files, but it will show their psi separately (may still be interesting to you) ; however, you can show the grouped values by specifying a grouping file to voila (defines how to group psicoverage files together in a voila view); in this case the file would just have a single group defined. The contents of the file is a simple .tsv with columns 'group' and 'prefix' ; for example, using the workshop example data, for the three Adr samples the file would look like the one attached. You specify the file to voila using the --psicov-grouping-file switch. Note: I am aware this is a workaround and more cumbersome than v2, so the default functionality will be improved shortly and made more clear in the documentation. Using voila this way will also show median reads as well as optional splicegraphs for each experiment.
Please let me know if this method helps for your case.
Thanks!
-San