-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 53
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fail to reproduce Fig.5 results for human data #65
Comments
Hi @jonathan-f, Thank you for bringing this to our notice. For some strange reason, all the lines in STRING-network.csv are duplicated and the #Edges is 2x / the density is 2x (i.e., EPR is 0.5x) the one you see in Fig 5. While we make changes to generateExpInputs.py to compute the correct number of of edges; please use Best, |
@adyprat thanks for looking into this issue. Can we upload the correct version of the STRING network to prevent this issue for recurring again? I presume this file is on Zenodo. |
Dear @adyprat , thanks for the swift reply and for finding the error. Best |
Hello, sorry for bothering. I am also facing some issues in reproducing the results of Fig.5 of the paper. I downloaded the data (BEELINE-data and Networks) from Zenodo and used the the generateExpInputs.py.
I found that the Gene names in Non-Specific-ChIP-seq-network.csv are uppercase, which is different from ExpressionData.csv, so I add
I need some help for these problems. Maybe there are some steps for data preprocessing and I ignore them, please give me some advice. Thank you |
Hello,
First thanks for your impressive work!
I am facing issues in reproducing the results of Fig.5 of the paper for the human datasets using the STRING ground truth net, while I manage to reproduce the results for the mouse datasets.
I used the script generateExpInputs.py, getting the following statistics:
hHep STRING: #TFs: 409, #Genes: 656, #Edges: 15046, Density: 0.056
hESC STRING: #TFs: 343, #Genes: 517, #Edges: 8514, Density: 0.048
These densities are different from fig. 5, why?
I ran PIDC several times using BLRunner.py and then I used BLEvaluator.py to compute the early precision (EP), I always get:
hHep STRING: EP=0.08, while it should be 0,105 according to Fig. 5 (multiplying the EPR by the net density from fig. 5=0.03).
hESC STRING: EP=0.074, which seems correct with the density indicated in Fig.5, but not with the one reported above.
Also for the other algorithms I get an EP smaller than that shown in Fig.5. Do you have an idea of the reason? Could you provide your rankedEdges.csv file for PIDC for the hHep dataset for comparison please?
Thank you
Best wishes
Jonathan
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: