The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Validating clustering for gene expression data
Open accessAbstract
Motivation: Many clustering algorithms have been proposed for the analysis of gene expression data, but little guidance is available to help choose among them. We provide a systematic framework for assessing the results of clustering algorithms. Clustering algorithms attempt to partition the genes into groups exhibiting similar patterns of variation in expression level. Our methodology is to apply a clustering algorithm to the data from all but one experimental condition. The remaining condition is used to assess the predictive power of the resulting clusters—meaningful clusters should exhibit less variation in the remaining condition than clusters formed by chance. Results: We successfully applied our methodology to compare six clustering algorithms on four gene expression data sets. We found our quantitative measures of cluster quality to be positively correlated with external standards of cluster quality. Availability: The software is under development. Contact: kayee@cs.washington.edu Supplementary information: http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/kayee/cluster or http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/ruzzo/cluster * To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cluster analysis and display of genome-wide expression patterns
Eisen, M. B., Spellman, P. T., Brown, P. O., & Botstein, D. (1998) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.95.25.14863 · Cited by 16,184
A Study of Cross-Validation and Bootstrap for Accuracy Estimation and Model Selection
Kohavi, R. (1995) · Zenodo · doi:10.5281/zenodo.19712698 · Cited by 10,909
The Jackknife, the Bootstrap and Other Resampling Plans
Efron, B. (1982) · Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics eBooks · doi:10.1137/1.9781611970319 · Cited by 8,120
Estimating the Number of Clusters in a Data Set Via the Gap Statistic
Tibshirani, R., Walther, G., & Hastie, T. (2001) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology · doi:10.1111/1467-9868.00293 · Cited by 6,205
Cited by
TM4: a free, open-source system for microarray data management and analysis
Saeed, A. I., Sharov, V., White, J., Li, J., Liang, W., Bhagabati, N., Braisted, J., Klapa, M., Currier, T., Thiagarajan, M., et al. (2003) · BioTechniques · doi:10.2144/03342mt01 · Cited by 4,837
Martinez, F. O., Gordon, S., Locati, M., & Mantovani, A. (2006) · The Journal of Immunology · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.177.10.7303 · Cited by 2,125
Monti, S., Tamayo, P., Mesirov, J., & Golub, T. (2003) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1023/a:1023949509487 · Cited by 2,116
Time-series clustering – A decade review
Aghabozorgi, S., Seyed Shirkhorshidi, A., & Ying Wah, T. (2015) · Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.is.2015.04.007 · Cited by 1,826
Microarray data analysis: from disarray to consolidation and consensus
Allison, D. B., Cui, X., Page, G. P., & Sabripour, M. (2006) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg1749 · Cited by 1,339
Metadata
- Authors
- Yeung, K. Y., Haynor, D. R., & Ruzzo, W. L.
- Venue
- Bioinformatics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2001-04-01
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 309-318
- ISSN
- 1367-4803 (ISSN-L)
- 1367-4811
- OpenAlex
- W2131456395
- Cited by
- 711
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 11.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Validating clustering for gene expression data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/bioinformatics/17.4.309
- The paper
- Yeung, K. Y., Haynor, D. R., & Ruzzo, W. L. (2001). Validating clustering for gene expression data. Bioinformatics. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/17.4.309
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.