You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Clustering results using k=2 clusters, for both kmeans and nmf, do not follow into clustering results for k=3 or k=4 clustering. When looking at clustering results and comparing k=2 to k=3, very few samples in k=3 remain in their k=2 cluster.
Additionally, when compared to Way et. al. 2016, clustering for k=2 appears reversed in Supplementary Table S3. Samples placed in cluster 1 in this analysis appear in cluster 2 in the published paper.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Is k = 2 the only difference @changt34x ? Are they like this for all datasets? Its possible that the different subsetting steps (new common_genes) performed by @amyecampbell altered the cluster assignment numbers
I haven't compared all of the samples (due to the change in ordering or addition/removal of samples between the current version and the paper) but from a random set of comparisons it only affects k=2 for kmeans and NMF, but not any other.
Clustering results using k=2 clusters, for both kmeans and nmf, do not follow into clustering results for k=3 or k=4 clustering. When looking at clustering results and comparing k=2 to k=3, very few samples in k=3 remain in their k=2 cluster.
Additionally, when compared to Way et. al. 2016, clustering for k=2 appears reversed in Supplementary Table S3. Samples placed in cluster 1 in this analysis appear in cluster 2 in the published paper.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: