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
Hi there. Thanks in advance for an easy-to-use and well documented tool, and any input you might be able to provide!
Was wondering if you had any thoughts on how applicable the method is to imaging-based spatial transcriptomics data? Specifically, there's a comment somewhere that things are "independent of normalization" as the ranking is done in a per-cell manner, however:
I am worried that rankings (where ties are resolved randomly?) could be off when the dynamic range is much smaller, e.g., counts are mostly 0 or 1 with few large values. My feeling is that things come down to "is a set of genes detected at large or not" rather than how strong expression levels are.
Also: Would you expect results to differ at all without any normalization? I.e., using raw counts? Asking because standard normalization procedures aren't applicable here/it is less straightforward to obtain values on an expression-like scale.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi there. Thanks in advance for an easy-to-use and well documented tool, and any input you might be able to provide!
Was wondering if you had any thoughts on how applicable the method is to imaging-based spatial transcriptomics data? Specifically, there's a comment somewhere that things are "independent of normalization" as the ranking is done in a per-cell manner, however:
I am worried that rankings (where ties are resolved randomly?) could be off when the dynamic range is much smaller, e.g., counts are mostly 0 or 1 with few large values. My feeling is that things come down to "is a set of genes detected at large or not" rather than how strong expression levels are.
Also: Would you expect results to differ at all without any normalization? I.e., using raw counts? Asking because standard normalization procedures aren't applicable here/it is less straightforward to obtain values on an expression-like scale.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: