Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 301

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluation and comparison of gene clustering methods in microarray analysis

Open access
Thalamuthu, Anbupalam, Mukhopadhyay, Indranil, Zheng, Xiaojing, Tseng, George C.·2006·Bioinformatics

Abstract

Motivation: Microarray technology has been widely applied in biological and clinical studies for simultaneous monitoring of gene expression in thousands of genes. Gene clustering analysis is found useful for discovering groups of correlated genes potentially co-regulated or associated to the disease or conditions under investigation. Many clustering methods including hierarchical clustering, K-means, PAM, SOM, mixture model-based clustering and tight clustering have been widely used in the literature. Yet no comprehensive comparative study has been performed to evaluate the effectiveness of these methods. Results: In this paper, six gene clustering methods are evaluated by simulated data from a hierarchical log-normal model with various degrees of perturbation as well as four real datasets. A weighted Rand index is proposed for measuring similarity of two clustering results with possible scattered genes (i.e. a set of noise genes not being clustered). Performance of the methods in the real data is assessed by a predictive accuracy analysis through verified gene annotations. Our results show that tight clustering and model-based clustering consistently outperform other clustering methods both in simulated and real data while hierarchical clustering and SOM perform among the worst. Our analysis provides deep insight to the complicated gene clustering problem of expression profile and serves as a practical guideline for routine microarray cluster analysis. Contact: ctseng@pitt.edu Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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/btl406

Cites

5 of 5 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 5 references

Cited by

See all 301

Metadata

Authors
Thalamuthu, A., Mukhopadhyay, I., Zheng, X., & Tseng, G. C.
Venue
Bioinformatics
Published
2006-07-31
Volume
22
Issue
19
Pages
2405-2412
ISSN
  • 1367-4803 (ISSN-L)
  • 1367-4811
OpenAlex
W2140736261
Cited by
301
References
5
FWCI
8.10
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: Evaluation and comparison of gene clustering methods in microarray analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/bioinformatics/btl406
The paper
Thalamuthu, A., Mukhopadhyay, I., Zheng, X., & Tseng, G. C. (2006). Evaluation and comparison of gene clustering methods in microarray analysis. Bioinformatics. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btl406

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.