Susmita Datta

The R package clValid contains functions for validating the results of a clustering analysis. There are three main types of cluster validation measures available, "internal", "stability", and "biological". The user can choose from nine clustering algorithms in existing R packages, including hierarchical, K-means, self-organizing maps (SOM), and model-based clustering. In addition, we provide a function to perform the self-organizing tree algorithm (SOTA) method of clustering. Any combination of validation measures and clustering methods can be requested in a single function call. This allows the user to simultaneously evaluate several clustering algorithms while varying the number of clusters, to help determine the most appropriate method and number of clusters for the dataset of interest. Additionally, the package can automatically make use of the biological information contained in the Gene Ontology (GO) database to calculate the biological validation measures, via the annotation packages available in Bioconductor. The function returns an object of S4 class "clValid", which has summary, plot, print, and additional methods which allow the user to display the optimal validation scores and extract clustering results.

MOTIVATION: With the advent of microarray chip technology, large data sets are emerging containing the simultaneous expression levels of thousands of genes at various time points during a biological process. Biologists are attempting to group genes based on the temporal pattern of their expression levels. While the use of hierarchical clustering (UPGMA) with correlation 'distance' has been the most common in the microarray studies, there are many more choices of clustering algorithms in pattern recognition and statistics literature. At the moment there do not seem to be any clear-cut guidelines regarding the choice of a clustering algorithm to be used for grouping genes based on their expression profiles. RESULTS: In this paper, we consider six clustering algorithms (of various flavors!) and evaluate their performances on a well-known publicly available microarray data set on sporulation of budding yeast and on two simulated data sets. Among other things, we formulate three reasonable validation strategies that can be used with any clustering algorithm when temporal observations or replications are present. We evaluate each of these six clustering methods with these validation measures. While the 'best' method is dependent on the exact validation strategy and the number of clusters to be used, overall Diana appears to be a solid performer. Interestingly, the performance of correlation-based hierarchical clustering and model-based clustering (another method that has been advocated by a number of researchers) appear to be on opposite extremes, depending on what validation measure one employs. Next it is shown that the group means produced by Diana are the closest and those produced by UPGMA are the farthest from a model profile based on a set of hand-picked genes. AVAILABILITY: S+ codes for the partial least squares based clustering are available from the authors upon request. All other clustering methods considered have S+ implementation in the library MASS. S+ codes for calculating the validation measures are available from the authors upon request. The sporulation data set is publicly available at http://cmgm.stanford.edu/pbrown/sporulation

BACKGROUND: Researchers in the field of bioinformatics often face a challenge of combining several ordered lists in a proper and efficient manner. Rank aggregation techniques offer a general and flexible framework that allows one to objectively perform the necessary aggregation. With the rapid growth of high-throughput genomic and proteomic studies, the potential utility of rank aggregation in the context of meta-analysis becomes even more apparent. One of the major strengths of rank-based aggregation is the ability to combine lists coming from different sources and platforms, for example different microarray chips, which may or may not be directly comparable otherwise. RESULTS: The RankAggreg package provides two methods for combining the ordered lists: the Cross-Entropy method and the Genetic Algorithm. Two examples of rank aggregation using the package are given in the manuscript: one in the context of clustering based on gene expression, and the other one in the context of meta-analysis of prostate cancer microarray experiments. CONCLUSION: The two examples described in the manuscript clearly show the utility of the RankAggreg package in the current bioinformatics context where ordered lists are routinely produced as a result of modern high-throughput technologies.