ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2021
Practical selection of representative sets of RNA-seq samples using a hierarchical approach.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data-driven AI system for learning how to run transcript assemblers.Genome biology · 2026Article
- Pilot study using a discrete mathematical approach for topological analysis and ssGSEA of gene expression in autosomal recessive polycystic kidney disease.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
motivationDespite numerous RNA-seq samples available at large databases, most RNA-seq analysis tools are evaluated on a limited number of RNA-seq samples. This drives a need for methods to select a representative subset from all available RNA-seq samples to facilitate comprehensive, unbiased evaluation of bioinformatics tools. In sequence-based approaches for representative set selection (e.g. a k-mer counting approach that selects a subset based on k-mer similarities between RNA-seq samples), because of the large numbers of available RNA-seq samples and of k-mers/sequences in each sample, computing the full similarity matrix using k-mers/sequences for the entire set of RNA-seq samples in a large database (e.g. the SRA) has memory and runtime challenges; this makes direct representative set selection infeasible with limited computing resources.
resultsWe developed a novel computational method called 'hierarchical representative set selection' to handle this challenge. Hierarchical representative set selection is a divide-and-conquer-like algorithm that breaks representative set selection into sub-selections and hierarchically selects representative samples through multiple levels. We demonstrate that hierarchical representative set selection can achieve summarization quality close to that of direct representative set selection, while largely reducing runtime and memory requirements of computing the full similarity matrix (up to 8.4× runtime reduction and 5.35× memory reduction for 10 000 and 12 000 samples respectively that could be practically run with direct subset selection). We show that hierarchical representative set selection substantially outperforms random sampling on the entire SRA set of RNA-seq samples, making it a practical solution to representative set selection on large databases like the SRA. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The code is available at https://github.com/Kingsford-Group/hierrepsetselection and https://github.com/Kingsford-Group/jellyfishsim. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.