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
Thanks for your previous reply, I successfully completed the SCENT pipeline in multiome datasets included multiple celltypes. yet I have some questions about exploring and interpreting SCENT prediction results. I inputed known E2G links inferred from SCENIC+ tools, and tried to verify it using SCENT algorithm. Finally, based on the boot_basic_p<0.0005, I filtered out 1.4K out of 13k results. And I plotted the boot_basic_p and beta distribution before and after filter, I noticed there are a group of particularly strong negatively correlated E2Gs.
Do they have biological significance? Is the SCENT algorithm biased toward increasing the true positive rate?
Best regards!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thanks for your previous reply, I successfully completed the SCENT pipeline in multiome datasets included multiple celltypes. yet I have some questions about exploring and interpreting SCENT prediction results. I inputed known E2G links inferred from SCENIC+ tools, and tried to verify it using SCENT algorithm. Finally, based on the boot_basic_p<0.0005, I filtered out 1.4K out of 13k results. And I plotted the boot_basic_p and beta distribution before and after filter, I noticed there are a group of particularly strong negatively correlated E2Gs.
Do they have biological significance? Is the SCENT algorithm biased toward increasing the true positive rate?
Best regards!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: