[Bioc-devel] SummarizedExperiment vs ExpressionSet
lawrence.michael at gene.com
Wed Nov 26 18:33:31 CET 2014
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Peter Haverty <haverty.peter at gene.com>
> Hi all,
> I believe there is a strong need for an object that organizes a collection
> of rectangular data (matrices, etc.) with metadata on the rows and
> columns. Can SummarizedExperiment inherit from something simpler that has
> a DataFrame as rowData?
(I believe GenomicRanges should inherit from
> DataTable, rather than Vector, and subset as x[i,j], but maybe that's
> getting a bit off topic.)
Have to disagree on that. A GRanges is a vector of ranges; a table is a
list of vectors all of the same length. Different things. There was a lot
of thought invested in that. But it does subset as x[i,j], so in theory
SummarizedExperiment could be generalized to contain something with the
contract of 2D extraction.
> I often see people stuffing arbitrary data into
> an ExpressionSet and calling one of the assays "exprs" as a work-around.
> Peter M. Haverty, Ph.D.
> Genentech, Inc.
> phaverty at gene.com
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 7:19 AM, Laurent Gatto <lg390 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> > On 26 November 2014 14:59, Wolfgang Huber wrote:
> > > A colleague and I are designing a package for quantitative proteomics
> > > data, and we are debating whether to base it on the
> > > SummarizedExperiment or the ExpressionSet class.
> > >
> > > There is no immediate use for the ranges aspect of
> > > SummarizedExperiment, so that would have to be carried around with
> > > NAs, and this is a parsimony argument for using ExpressionSet
> > > instead. OTOH, the interface of SummarizedExperiment is cleaner, its
> > > code more modern and more likely to be updated, and users of the
> > > Bioconductor project are likely to benefit from having to deal with a
> > > single interface that works the same or similarly across packages,
> > > rather than a variety of formats; which argues that new packages
> > > should converge towards SummarizedExperiment('s interface).
> > >
> > > Are there any pertinent insights from this group?
> > Instead of ExpressionSet, you could use MSnbase::MSnSet, which is
> > essentially an ExpressionSet for quantitative proteomics (i.e it has a
> > MIAPE slot, instead of MIAME for example).
> > Ideally, a SummarizedExperiment for proteomics would use peptide/protein
> > ranges, which is in the pipeline, as far as I am concerned. When that
> > becomes available, there should be infrastructure to coerce and MSnSet
> > (and/or other relevant data) into an SummarizedExperiment.
> > Hope this helps.
> > Best wishes,
> > Laurent
> > > Thanks and best wishes
> > > Wolfgang
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Bioc-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> > > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel
> > --
> > Laurent Gatto
> > http://cpu.sysbiol.cam.ac.uk/
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bioc-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel
> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
> Bioc-devel at r-project.org mailing list
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
More information about the Bioc-devel