SpatialSort: a Bayesian model for clustering and cell population annotation of spatial proteomics data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Recent advances in spatial proteomics technologies have enabled the profiling of dozens of proteins in thousands of single cells in situ. This has created the opportunity to move beyond quantifying the composition of cell types in tissue, and instead probe the spatial relationships between cells. However, most current methods for clustering data from these assays only consider the expression values of cells and ignore the spatial context. Furthermore, existing approaches do not account for prior information about the expected cell populations in a sample. RESULTS: To address these shortcomings, we developed SpatialSort, a spatially aware Bayesian clustering approach that allows for the incorporation of prior biological knowledge. Our method is able to account for the affinities of cells of different types to neighbour in space, and by incorporating prior information about expected cell populations, it is able to simultaneously improve clustering accuracy and perform automated annotation of clusters. Using synthetic and real data, we show that by using spatial and prior information SpatialSort improves clustering accuracy. We also demonstrate how SpatialSort can perform label transfer between spatial and nonspatial modalities through the analysis of a real world diffuse large B-cell lymphoma dataset. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Source code is available on Github at: https://github.com/Roth-Lab/SpatialSort.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".