Meta-analysis of (single-cell method) benchmarks reveals the need for extensibility and interoperability
Authors:
- Anthony SonrelASAnthony Sonrel
- Almut LuetgeALAlmut Luetge
- Charlotte SonesonCSCharlotte Soneson
- Izaskun MallonaIMIzaskun Mallona
- Pierre-Luc GermainPGPierre-Luc Germain
- Sergey KnyazevSKSergey Knyazev
- Jeroen GilisJGJeroen Gilis
- Reto GerberRGReto Gerber
- Ruth SeurinckRSRuth Seurinck
- Helena L. CrowellHCHelena L. Crowell
Preprint
Abstract
Computational methods represent the lifeblood of modern molecular biology. Benchmarking is important for all methods, but with a focus here on computational methods, benchmarking is critical to dissect important steps of analysis pipelines, formally assess performance across common situations as well as edge cases, and ultimately guide users on what tools to use. Benchmarking can also be important for community building and advancing methods in a principled way. We conducted a meta-analysis of recent single-cell benchmarks to summarize the scope, extensibility, neutrality, as well as technical features and whether best practices in open data and reproducible research were followed. The results highlight that while benchmarks often make code available and are in principle reproducible, they remain difficult to extend, for example, as new methods and new ways to assess methods emerge. In addition, embracing containerization and workflow systems would enhance reusability of intermediate benchmarking results, thus also driving wider adoption.Keywords
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- Essential guidelines for computational method benchmarkingGenome Biology, 2019
- Challenges and recommendations to improve the installability and archival stability of omics computational toolsPLOS Biology, 2019
- Systematic benchmarking of omics computational toolsNature Communications, 2019
- Exploring the single-cell RNA-seq analysis landscape with the scRNA-tools databasePLOS Computational Biology, 2018
- Modelling science trustworthiness under publish or perish pressureRoyal Society Open Science, 2018
- Lessons Learned: Recommendations for Establishing Critical Periodic Scientific BenchmarkingbioRxiv, 2017
- Biological data sciences in genome researchGenome Research, 2015
- The self‐assessment trap: can we all be better than average?Molecular Systems Biology, 2011
- Issues in bioinformatics benchmarking: the case study of multiple sequence alignmentNucleic Acids Research, 2010
- Dialogue on Reverse‐Engineering Assessment and MethodsAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 2007