↓ Skip to main content

BayesHammer: Bayesian clustering for error correction in single-cell sequencing

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 tweeters
patent
1 patent
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
359 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
382 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
BayesHammer: Bayesian clustering for error correction in single-cell sequencing
Published in
BMC Genomics, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-14-s1-s7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sergey I Nikolenko, Anton I Korobeynikov, Max A Alekseyev

Abstract

Error correction of sequenced reads remains a difficult task, especially in single-cell sequencing projects with extremely non-uniform coverage. While existing error correction tools designed for standard (multi-cell) sequencing data usually come up short in single-cell sequencing projects, algorithms actually used for single-cell error correction have been so far very simplistic.We introduce several novel algorithms based on Hamming graphs and Bayesian subclustering in our new error correction tool BAYESHAMMER. While BAYESHAMMER was designed for single-cell sequencing, we demonstrate that it also improves on existing error correction tools for multi-cell sequencing data while working much faster on real-life datasets. We benchmark BAYESHAMMER on both k-mer counts and actual assembly results with the SPADES genome assembler.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 382 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 9 2%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Other 5 1%
Unknown 356 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 117 31%
Researcher 77 20%
Student > Master 54 14%
Student > Bachelor 25 7%
Student > Postgraduate 18 5%
Other 52 14%
Unknown 39 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 158 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 63 16%
Computer Science 35 9%
Environmental Science 24 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 13 3%
Other 34 9%
Unknown 55 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 June 2022.
All research outputs
#1,267,792
of 22,757,090 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#249
of 10,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,006
of 280,896 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#9
of 374 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,090 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,637 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 280,896 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 374 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.