↓ Skip to main content

The rainfall plot: its motivation, characteristics and pitfalls

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Bioinformatics, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
The rainfall plot: its motivation, characteristics and pitfalls
Published in
BMC Bioinformatics, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12859-017-1679-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Diana Domanska, Daniel Vodák, Christin Lund-Andersen, Stefania Salvatore, Eivind Hovig, Geir Kjetil Sandve

Abstract

A visualization referred to as rainfall plot has recently gained popularity in genome data analysis. The plot is mostly used for illustrating the distribution of somatic cancer mutations along a reference genome, typically aiming to identify mutation hotspots. In general terms, the rainfall plot can be seen as a scatter plot showing the location of events on the x-axis versus the distance between consecutive events on the y-axis. Despite its frequent use, the motivation for applying this particular visualization and the appropriateness of its usage have never been critically addressed in detail. We show that the rainfall plot allows visual detection even for events occurring at high frequency over very short distances. In addition, event clustering at multiple scales may be detected as distinct horizontal bands in rainfall plots. At the same time, due to the limited size of standard figures, rainfall plots might suffer from inability to distinguish overlapping events, especially when multiple datasets are plotted in the same figure. We demonstrate the consequences of plot congestion, which results in obscured visual data interpretations. This work provides the first comprehensive survey of the characteristics and proper usage of rainfall plots. We find that the rainfall plot is able to convey a large amount of information without any need for parameterization or tuning. However, we also demonstrate how plot congestion and the use of a logarithmic y-axis may result in obscured visual data interpretations. To aid the productive utilization of rainfall plots, we demonstrate their characteristics and potential pitfalls using both simulated and real data, and provide a set of practical guidelines for their proper interpretation and usage.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 51 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 16 31%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 12%
Student > Master 6 12%
Professor 3 6%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 8 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 22 42%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 19%
Computer Science 3 6%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 10 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 06 November 2018.
All research outputs
#18,345,259
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from BMC Bioinformatics
#6,088
of 7,400 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#225,616
of 314,710 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Bioinformatics
#80
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,400 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 314,710 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.