Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 910

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A systematic comparison and evaluation of biclustering methods for gene expression data

Open access
Prelić, Amela, Bleuler, Stefan, Zimmermann, Philip, Wille, Anja, Bühlmann, Peter, Gruissem, Wilhelm, Hennig, Lars, Thiele, Lothar, Zitzler, Eckart·2006·Bioinformatics

Abstract

Motivation: In recent years, there have been various efforts to overcome the limitations of standard clustering approaches for the analysis of gene expression data by grouping genes and samples simultaneously. The underlying concept, which is often referred to as biclustering, allows to identify sets of genes sharing compatible expression patterns across subsets of samples, and its usefulness has been demonstrated for different organisms and datasets. Several biclustering methods have been proposed in the literature; however, it is not clear how the different techniques compare with each other with respect to the biological relevance of the clusters as well as with other characteristics such as robustness and sensitivity to noise. Accordingly, no guidelines concerning the choice of the biclustering method are currently available. Results: First, this paper provides a methodology for comparing and validating biclustering methods that includes a simple binary reference model. Although this model captures the essential features of most biclustering approaches, it is still simple enough to exactly determine all optimal groupings; to this end, we propose a fast divide-and-conquer algorithm (Bimax). Second, we evaluate the performance of five salient biclustering algorithms together with the reference model and a hierarchical clustering method on various synthetic and real datasets for Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Arabidopsis thaliana. The comparison reveals that (1) biclustering in general has advantages over a conventional hierarchical clustering approach, (2) there are considerable performance differences between the tested methods and (3) already the simple reference model delivers relevant patterns within all considered settings. Availability: The datasets used, the outcomes of the biclustering algorithms and the Bimax implementation for the reference model are available at Contact: bleuler@tik.ee.ethz.ch Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/bioinformatics/btl060

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 41 references

Cited by

See all 910

Metadata

Authors
Prelić, A., Bleuler, S., Zimmermann, P., Wille, A., Bühlmann, P., Gruissem, W., Hennig, L., Thiele, L., & Zitzler, E.
Venue
Bioinformatics
Published
2006-02-24
Volume
22
Issue
9
Pages
1122-1129
ISSN
  • 1367-4803 (ISSN-L)
  • 1367-4811
OpenAlex
W2105883975
Cited by
910
References
41
FWCI
18.30
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: A systematic comparison and evaluation of biclustering methods for gene expression data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/bioinformatics/btl060
The paper
Prelić, A., Bleuler, S., Zimmermann, P., Wille, A., Bühlmann, P., Gruissem, W., Hennig, L., Thiele, L., & Zitzler, E. (2006). A systematic comparison and evaluation of biclustering methods for gene expression data. Bioinformatics. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btl060

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.