-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
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
Update delta median section #520
Conversation
Co-authored-by: Joshua Shapiro <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I like the changes, I just made a few comments.
One other thing, it looks like the scores returned by SingleR
are always between 0-1? So theoretically, the max delta median statistic could be 1 right? I think we may want to say that to add some sort of help in interpretation. Yes, higher is better, but knowing how high it can be might be helpful.
") | ||
``` | ||
|
||
|
||
```{r, eval = has_singler, warning=FALSE, message=FALSE,fig.height = 6, fig.width = 8} | ||
```{r, eval = has_singler, warning=FALSE, message=FALSE, fig.height = 7, fig.width = 6.5} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we dynamically set this plot height based on the number of cell types? I assume that not every cell type will be assigned in every sample so the size of this plot may change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I like the figure width though. But maybe something like num_celltypes * 0.5
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You know, I've never done this! I'll try it out!
Thanks for the feedback @allyhawkins! I've made suggested changes, for now I did end up linking the Current report: celltypes_supplemental_report.html.zip |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Changes look mostly good. I just had a few small comments. The only thing I'm still back and forth on is the line about "internal confident assessment".
Co-authored-by: Ally Hawkins <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ally Hawkins <[email protected]>
@allyhawkins next round is here: celltypes_supplemental_report.html.zip There was one suggestion comment of yours that I did not implement since I wanted to make sure first I understood exactly what you meant, it's left unresolved above! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I had some more thoughts about the text...
Co-authored-by: Joshua Shapiro <[email protected]>
… dataset not model.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One minor change, but otherwise LGTM
remove extra colon i introduced
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Closes #517
This PR updates the delta median section of the cell type QC report and hits all the bullets in #517. I think the diamonds look fine in the plot; the only spots where they are a little weird is for cell types with only ONE cell, but I think that just kind of is what it is no matter what!
Any viz or textual feedback welcome!
EDIT: A rendered report!
celltypes_supplemental_report.html.zip