MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404647992 · doi:10.1093/bioadv/vbag121

New algorithms for unsupervised cell clustering from scRNA-seq data

2024· preprint· en· W4404647992 on OpenAlexaff
Melissa Robles, Jorge Díaz-Riaño, Cristhian Forigua, Laura Guio, Paula Siaucho, Jennifer J Guzmán-Porras, Danilo García-Orjuela, Andrés Naranjo, Silvia Maradei, Adolfo J. Quiróz, Jorge Duitama

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics Advances · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomics
Canadian institutionsMisericordia Community Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCluster analysisComputer scienceBiclusteringArtificial intelligenceData miningAlgorithmCorrelation clusteringCURE data clustering algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The identification of cell types is a basic step of pipelines for Single-Cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) data analysis. However, unsupervised clustering of cells from scRNA-seq data has multiple challenges: high dimensionality, sparseness of the expression matrix, and technical noise that generates false zero entries. In this study, we introduce new algorithms for clustering scRNA-seq data. The first algorithm builds a k-MST graph from distances obtained directly from the input data without dimensionality reduction. The computation follows an iterative procedure of k steps, calculating the edges of minimum spanning trees over different subgraphs obtained by removing edges selected in previous iterations. The Louvain algorithm is executed on the k-MST graph for cell clustering. We also explored an alternative based on neural networks, using an autoencoder to learn the parameters of a Gaussian mixture model. Benchmark experiments show that the algorithms have competitive accuracy, compared to previous solutions. Sequencing depth, number of cells and tissue types have important effects on the performance of the algorithms. Further experiments with scRNA-data taken from a patient with refractory epilepsy show that the autoencoder model achieved the best accuracy for this dataset, and the k-MST was competitive among graph-based approaches.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformatics AdvancesSame topicSingle-cell and spatial transcriptomicsFrench-language works237,207