Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Reference for pearson residual normalization #243

Open
eroell opened this issue Oct 25, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

Reference for pearson residual normalization #243

eroell opened this issue Oct 25, 2023 · 2 comments
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation

Comments

@eroell
Copy link
Contributor

eroell commented Oct 25, 2023

Question
Hey,

In 7.3 Analytic Pearson Residuals, Germain et al. is cited as a the recommender.
While this benchmark is very comprehensive, here rather sctransform is recommended "We further evaluated normalization methods by investigating their impact on the separability of the subpopulations. [...] In general, sctransform systematically outperformed other methods."

Lause et al., on the other hand, recommend the approximate analytic pearson residuals, also over sctransform.
The sc.pp.experimental.pearson_residuals function used in 7.3 Analytic Pearson Residuals also references Lause et al. in its documentation.

So wouldn't it be more Lause et al. that should be cited here?

I'd suggest to add a sentence about Germain et al.'s work where suitable and keep this reference.

Interested in what you think - I might be missing something here.

Could do a PR with this additional citation if you agree

@eroell eroell added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Oct 25, 2023
@AnnaChristina
Copy link
Member

I generally agree but we aimed to not base our recommendation based on claims from method authors, but only independent benchmarks.

Feel free to add one additional sentence, but potentially keep both citations.

@eroell
Copy link
Contributor Author

eroell commented Jan 21, 2024

Just a sidenote, did not forget, since not high priority will take a glance once I got some bandwith for the topic to make this right

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants