Comparison of algorithms used in single-cell transcriptomic data analysis

Jafar Isbarov, Elmir Mahammadov
{"title":"Comparison of algorithms used in single-cell transcriptomic data analysis","authors":"Jafar Isbarov, Elmir Mahammadov","doi":"arxiv-2408.12031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Single-cell analysis is an increasingly relevant approach in \"omics''\nstudies. In the last decade, it has been applied to various fields, including\ncancer biology, neuroscience, and, especially, developmental biology. This rise\nin popularity has been accompanied with creation of modern software,\ndevelopment of new pipelines and design of new algorithms. Many established\nalgorithms have also been applied with varying levels of effectiveness.\nCurrently, there is an abundance of algorithms for all steps of the general\nworkflow. While some scientists use ready-made pipelines (such as Seurat),\nmanual analysis is popular, too, as it allows more flexibility. Scientists who\nperform their own analysis face multiple options when it comes to the choice of\nalgorithms. We have used two different datasets to test some of the most\nwidely-used algorithms. In this paper, we are going to report the main\ndifferences between them, suggest a minimal number of algorithms for each step,\nand explain our suggestions. In certain stages, it is impossible to make a\nclear choice without further context. In these cases, we are going to explore\nthe major possibilities, and make suggestions for each one of them.","PeriodicalId":501070,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - QuanBio - Genomics","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - QuanBio - Genomics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2408.12031","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Single-cell analysis is an increasingly relevant approach in "omics'' studies. In the last decade, it has been applied to various fields, including cancer biology, neuroscience, and, especially, developmental biology. This rise in popularity has been accompanied with creation of modern software, development of new pipelines and design of new algorithms. Many established algorithms have also been applied with varying levels of effectiveness. Currently, there is an abundance of algorithms for all steps of the general workflow. While some scientists use ready-made pipelines (such as Seurat), manual analysis is popular, too, as it allows more flexibility. Scientists who perform their own analysis face multiple options when it comes to the choice of algorithms. We have used two different datasets to test some of the most widely-used algorithms. In this paper, we are going to report the main differences between them, suggest a minimal number of algorithms for each step, and explain our suggestions. In certain stages, it is impossible to make a clear choice without further context. In these cases, we are going to explore the major possibilities, and make suggestions for each one of them.
单细胞转录组数据分析所用算法的比较
单细胞分析在 "omics''研究中是一种越来越重要的方法。在过去十年中,它已被应用于多个领域,包括癌症生物学、神经科学,尤其是发育生物学。随着这种方法的普及,现代软件的开发、新流水线的开发和新算法的设计也随之兴起。目前,有大量算法可用于一般工作流程的所有步骤。虽然有些科学家使用现成的管道(如 Seurat),但手动分析也很流行,因为它具有更大的灵活性。自己进行分析的科学家在选择算法时面临多种选择。我们使用了两个不同的数据集来测试一些使用最广泛的算法。在本文中,我们将报告它们之间的主要差异,为每个步骤建议最少数量的算法,并解释我们的建议。在某些阶段,如果没有进一步的背景知识,就无法做出明确的选择。在这种情况下,我们将探讨主要的可能性,并针对每一种可能性提出建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信