2014 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM 2014) 2014
DOI: 10.1109/asonam.2014.6921554
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Overlapping Stochastic Community Finding

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We project cells based on their computed latent space representation into two dimensions with PHATE (Moon et al, 2019), which gives a more interpretable visualization than applying PHATE to the original data by learning a lower-dimensional representation of the data based on both transcriptomic similarity, and similarity across ground truth conditions. We can also directly apply k -means clustering to H (0) , obtaining more informative clusters as evidenced by higher normalized mutual information (NMI) scores (McDaid et al, 2011), a common metric for benchmarking clustering algorithms that measures how concordant the clusters were with the original ground truth sample assignments. W (1) is an h × m learned weight matrix, where m is the number of genes.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We project cells based on their computed latent space representation into two dimensions with PHATE (Moon et al, 2019), which gives a more interpretable visualization than applying PHATE to the original data by learning a lower-dimensional representation of the data based on both transcriptomic similarity, and similarity across ground truth conditions. We can also directly apply k -means clustering to H (0) , obtaining more informative clusters as evidenced by higher normalized mutual information (NMI) scores (McDaid et al, 2011), a common metric for benchmarking clustering algorithms that measures how concordant the clusters were with the original ground truth sample assignments. W (1) is an h × m learned weight matrix, where m is the number of genes.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cellograph outperforms existing approaches in quantifying the effects of perturbations and offers a novel GNN framework to cluster and visualize single-cell data. In the following sections, we discuss the workflow of Cellograph, demonstrate its performance on three published scRNA-seq datasets, and benchmark it against previously published methods using cross-categorical entropy and normalized mutual information (McDaid et al, 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To evaluate the quality of the tested algorithms, we employ an implementation of the Normalized Mutual Information measure for sets of overlapping clusters (ONMI) [ 20 ]. We used it to measure the difference between the covering produced by the examined algorithm and the known labels.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…6a) and numbers of SEACells (Supplementary Fig. 6b), for both RNA and ATAC modalities, based on normalized mutual information (NMI) score 18 . Another key performance metric is the ability to capture rare cell states.…”
Section: Seacells Metacells Represent Accurate and Robust Cell Statesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…5a). Stem cells exhibit extensive priming of lineage gene regulatory elements, whereby enhancers are accessible for lineage-specific expression 18,33,34 . We used SEACells to better elucidate how the permissive epigenomic landscape of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) dynamically reconfigures to a sharply restricted landscape in differentiated cells.…”
Section: Seacells Reveals Accessibility Dynamics In Differentiationmentioning
confidence: 99%