Dataset Information

Statistical Significance of Clustering using Soft Thresholding.

ABSTRACT: Clustering methods have led to a number of important discoveries in bioinformatics and beyond. A major challenge in their use is determining which clusters represent important underlying structure, as opposed to spurious sampling artifacts. This challenge is especially serious, and very few methods are available, when the data are very high in dimension. Statistical Significance of Clustering (SigClust) is a recently developed cluster evaluation tool for high dimensional low sample size data. An important component of the SigClust approach is the very definition of a single cluster as a subset of data sampled from a multivariate Gaussian distribution. The implementation of SigClust requires the estimation of the eigenvalues of the covariance matrix for the null multivariate Gaussian distribution. We show that the original eigenvalue estimation can lead to a test that suffers from severe inflation of type-I error, in the important case where there are a few very large eigenvalues. This paper addresses this critical challenge using a novel likelihood based soft thresholding approach to estimate these eigenvalues, which leads to a much improved SigClust. Major improvements in SigClust performance are shown by both mathematical analysis, based on the new notion of Theoretical Cluster Index, and extensive simulation studies. Applications to some cancer genomic data further demonstrate the usefulness of these improvements.

SUBMITTER: Huang H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4706235 | biostudies-literature | 2015

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Statistical Significance of Clustering using Soft Thresholding.

Huang Hanwen H Liu Yufeng Y Yuan Ming M Marron J S JS

Journal of computational and graphical statistics : a joint publication of American Statistical Association, Institute of Mathematical Statistics, Interface Foundation of North America 20151210 4

Clustering methods have led to a number of important discoveries in bioinformatics and beyond. A major challenge in their use is determining which clusters represent important underlying structure, as opposed to spurious sampling artifacts. This challenge is especially serious, and very few methods are available, when the data are very high in dimension. Statistical Significance of Clustering (SigClust) is a recently developed cluster evaluation tool for high dimensional low sample size data. An ...[more]

PMID: 26755893

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Since the early 2010s, the neuroimaging field has paid more attention to the issue of false positives. Several journals have issued guidelines regarding statistical thresholds. Three papers have reported the statistical analysis of the thresholds used in fMRI literature, but they were published at least 3 years ago and surveyed papers published during 2007-2012. This study revisited this topic to evaluate the changes in this field. Methods: The PubMed database was searched to identify the task-based (not resting-state) fMRI papers published in 2017 and record their sample sizes, inferential methods (e.g., voxelwise or clusterwise), theoretical methods (e.g., parametric or non-parametric), significance level, cluster-defining primary threshold (CDT), volume of analysis (whole brain or region of interest) and software used. Results: The majority (95.6%) of the 388 analyzed articles reported statistics corrected for multiple comparisons. A large proportion (69.6%) of the 388 articles reported main results by clusterwise inference. The analyzed articles mostly used software Statistical Parametric Mapping (SPM), Analysis of Functional NeuroImages (AFNI), or FMRIB Software Library (FSL) to conduct statistical analysis. There were 70.9%, 37.6%, and 23.1% of SPM, AFNI, and FSL studies, respectively, that used a CDT of p ? 0.001. The statistical sample size across the articles ranged between 7 and 1,299 with a median of 33. Sample size did not significantly correlate with the level of statistical threshold. Conclusion: There were still around 53% (142/270) studies using clusterwise inference that chose a more liberal CDT than p = 0.001 (n = 121) or did not report their CDT (n = 21), down from around 61% reported by Woo et al. (2014). For FSL studies, it seemed that the CDT practice had no improvement since the survey by Woo et al. (2014). A few studies chose unconventional CDT such as p = 0.0125 or 0.004. Such practice might create an impression that the threshold alterations were attempted to show "desired" clusters. The median sample size used in the analyzed articles was similar to those reported in previous surveys. In conclusion, there seemed to be no change in the statistical practice compared to the early 2010s.

Dataset Information

Statistical Significance of Clustering using Soft Thresholding.

Publications

Statistical Significance of Clustering using Soft Thresholding.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets