Abstract:Among existing computational algorithms for single-cell RNA-seq analysis, clustering and trajectory inference are two major types of analysis that are routinely applied. For a given dataset, clustering and trajectory inference can generate vastly different visualizations that lead to very different interpretations of the data. To address this issue, we propose multiple scores to quantify the "clusterness" and "trajectoriness" of single-cell RNA-seq data, in other words, whether the data looks like a collection of distinct clusters or a continuum of progression trajectory. The scores we introduce are based on pairwise distance distribution, persistent homology, vector magnitude, Ripley's K, and degrees of connectivity. Using simulated datasets, we demonstrate that the proposed scores are able to effectively differentiate between cluster-like data and trajectory-like data. Using real single-cell RNA-seq datasets, we demonstrate the scores can serve as indicators of whether clustering analysis or trajectory inference is a more appropriate choice for biological interpretation of the data. Single-cell sequencing technologies have motivated development of numerous computational algorithms. Two main types of these algorithms are clustering and trajectory inference. When scientists have a scRNA-seq dataset, they usually pick one of these approaches based on what they think the data shows. If they think the data has distinct clusters of cells, they will analyze the data using clustering algorithms. If they think the data shows a continuous progression, they will use trajectory inference algorithms. However, sometimes using clustering and trajectory inference on the same data can lead to very different interpretations, where clustering algorithms produce distinct cell clusters while trajectory inference on the same data show continuous trajectories. This makes us wonder: which way of looking at the data is more appropriate? In this paper, we developed a pipeline for quantifying the "clusterness" and "trajectoriness" of scRNA-seq data, in other words, whether the data looks like a collection of distinct clusters or a continuum of progression trajectory. We think such geometric quantification is an important question that should be broadly discussed in the single-cell research community.

TiC2D: Trajectory Inference from Single-Cell RNA-Seq Data Using Consensus Clustering.

Scart: Recognizing Cell Clusters and Constructing Trajectory from Single-Cell Epigenomic Data

Concepts and Limitations for Learning Developmental Trajectories from Single Cell Genomics.

CellRank for Directed Single-Cell Fate Mapping

Population-Level Cell Trajectory Inference Based on Gaussian Distributions

Gene trajectory inference for single-cell data by optimal transport metrics

scInTime: A Computational Method Leveraging Single-Cell Trajectory and Gene Regulatory Networks to Identify Master Regulators of Cellular Differentiation

A robust and accurate single-cell data trajectory inference method using ensemble pseudotime

SCTC: inference of developmental potential from single-cell transcriptional complexity

Unraveling the timeline of gene expression: A pseudotemporal trajectory analysis of single-cell RNA sequencing data

Quantifying the clusterness and trajectoriness of single-cell RNA-seq data

Gene-level alignment of single-cell trajectories

Inference of Differentiation Time for Single Cell Transcriptomes Using Cell Population Reference Data

LISA2: Learning Complex Single-Cell Trajectory and Expression Trends

Trajectory-based differential expression analysis for single-cell sequencing data

Trajectory inference from single-cell genomics data with a process time model

Joint Trajectory Inference for Single-cell Genomics Using Deep Learning with a Mixture Prior

Reconstructing cell cycle pseudo time-series via single-cell transcriptome data

Identify Differential Genes and Cell Subclusters from Time-Series Scrna-Seq Data Using Sctitans.

Male immunologic infertility: sperm performance on in vitro fertilization.