Summary scenario.

Total evolution of empirical power and type I error for our 4 ensemble methods and 59 state-of-the-art methods at nominal level α = 0.05 for seven scenarios. Prop case: evolution of power given the evolution of proportion of cases in the cohort, based on empirical power ID n°14, n°11 and n°15 (Tables 1 and S5) and based on type I error ID n°6, n°3 and n°7 (Tables 1 and S3). Cohort size: evolution of power given the evolution of cohort size, based on empirical power ID n°6, n°7, n°8 and n°9 (Tables 1 and S5) and based on type I error ID n°1, n°2, n°3 and n°4 (Tables 1 and S3). % protective: evolution of power given the evolution of proportion of protective variants, based on empirical power ID n°11, n°12 and n°13 (Tables 1 and S5). % causal: evolution of power given the evolution of proportion of causal variants, based on empirical power ID n°2, n°3, n°4 and n°5 (Tables 1 and S5). Kind of variant: evolution of power given the inclusion of only rare variants versus rare and common variants, based on empirical power ID n°18 and n°10 (Tables 1 and S5) and based on type I error ID n°4 and n°5 (Tables 1 and S3). causal MAF cutoff: evolution of power given the evolution of causal MAF cutoff, based on empirical power ID n°1 and n°11 (Tables 1 and S5). Region size: evolution of power given the evolution of region size, based on empirical power ID n°17 and n°16 (Tables 1 and S5) and based on type I error ID n°8, n°3 and n°9 (Tables 1 and S3). For example, Excalibur_baseline (see column Test) has an increase of power of 0.056 when increasing proportion of cases / controls (see column Prop case). This comes from the total_evol column (see S10 Table column total_evol for 1. Proportion case/control for Excalibur_baseline at alpha 0.05).
(XLSX)