PreprintCited by 6Statistical Methods and InferenceStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsAdvanced Clustering Algorithms Research

Selective Inference for Hierarchical Clustering

Open access
Gao, Lucy L., Bien, Jacob, Witten, Daniela·2020·arXiv

Abstract

Classical tests for a difference in means control the type I error rate when the groups are defined a priori. However, when the groups are instead defined via clustering, then applying a classical test yields an extremely inflated type I error rate. Notably, this problem persists even if two separate and independent data sets are used to define the groups and to test for a difference in their means. To address this problem, in this paper, we propose a selective inference approach to test for a difference in means between two clusters. Our procedure controls the selective type I error rate by accounting for the fact that the choice of null hypothesis was made based on the data. We describe how to efficiently compute exact p-values for clusters obtained using agglomerative hierarchical clustering with many commonly-used linkages. We apply our method to simulated data and to single-cell RNA-sequencing data.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2012.02936

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The pseudobulk approach overcomes the inherent limitations of DE analysis comparisons between clusters, which suffer from using the same data to both select and test the null hypothesis.

    “This pseudobulk approach also overcomes the inherent limitations of DE analysis comparisons between clusters, which suffer from using the same data to both select and test the null hypothesis24,25.”
  • Due to issues with statistical analysis between clusters using the same data used to generate clustering, no statistical cutoff was employed and these lists were not used in downstream module scoring or analysis.

    “Due to the issues mentioned above with statistical analysis performed between clusters using the same data used to generate clustering24,25, we did not employ any statistical cutoff or use these lists in any downstream module scoring or analysis.”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gao, L. L., Bien, J., & Witten, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2020
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4287557338
Cited by
6
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (acceptedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1653017, CAREER, 1252624)
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA047869)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM123993)
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (R01EB026908)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Inference
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Clustering Algorithms Research
Keywords
selective inference, hierarchical clustering, type I error control, agglomerative clustering, cluster comparison, exact p-values, linkage, single-cell RNA sequencing

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