Figure 3
Performance comparison between scDeconv and RPC. (A) For the 100 RNA simulated samples in batch1, scDeconv and RPC perform similarly well on all four cell types. The x-axes are the true cell contents of the simulated data and the y-axes are the estimated ones from the models, and each dot is a simulated sample. (B) For the 10 batches of the simulated samples, scDeconv and RPC have similar PCCs, but the MAD and RMSD of scDeconv are better than RPC.

Performance comparison between scDeconv and RPC. (A) For the 100 RNA simulated samples in batch1, scDeconv and RPC perform similarly well on all four cell types. The x-axes are the true cell contents of the simulated data and the y-axes are the estimated ones from the models, and each dot is a simulated sample. (B) For the 10 batches of the simulated samples, scDeconv and RPC have similar PCCs, but the MAD and RMSD of scDeconv are better than RPC.

Close
This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Close

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

View Article Abstract & Purchase Options

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Close