WNN (Seurat v4) vs. totalVI (scvi-tools) for CITE-seq data
I want to build a UMAP from CITE-seq data with a joint embedding of the scRNA-seq and protein ab data. What's the 'best' method in terms of representing the most accurate embedding? In the totalVI paper, they say totalVI > Seurat v3. In the Seurat v4 paper, they say Seurat v4 > totalVI, but is there any independent benchmarks or other informed views? thanks
• 1,085 views
•
link
written
by
MutationalMeltdown
0 answers
No answers yet.
Log in to answer this question.
More posts like this
-
Multi-omic trajectory on CITE-Seq data
written by firestar
-
How to add VDJ clonotyping data to Seurat object of scRNA-seq
written by Akira •
-
scATAC-seq and scRNA-seq integration issue
written by inayat45shaikh •
-
Which pipeline to choose for RNA velocity
written by Meghamsh •
-
Why do UMAP on all scRNA-seq samples rather than a UMAP for each treatment?
written by rtrende •
-
Single cell RNA-seq: how many PCs to use for t-SNE/UMAP?
written by MutationalMeltdown
-
Best compression for single cell RNA-seq object
written by MutationalMeltdown
-
Force directed graphs compared to other dimensionality reduction methods for scRNA-seq
written by MutationalMeltdown
-
SRA data accession
written by JulianC •
-
PCA vs ICA prior to t-SNE or UMAP
written by rtrende •
