Message-ID: <CAC+N9BUMGsm2YwKiAH3L8gSy477ZZLqtiOHwfvwmbzqWk7iDeg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: 2017-10-19T14:29:00Z
From: Tim Triche, Jr.
Subject: [Bioc-devel] MultiAssayExperiment compared to SummarizedExperiment (was: Why should Bioconductor developers re-use core classes?)
In-Reply-To: <CAC+N9BXi92get7Brw0cR3Yo6hWSzdkiVb4EykmZT00SnucyjJg@mail.gmail.com>
And/or
MAE : SE :: Ragged : Tidy
;-)
--t
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Tim Triche, Jr. <tim.triche at gmail.com>
wrote:
> MAE : SE :: Tensor : Matrix
>
> --t
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 10:16 AM, Levi Waldron <
> lwaldron.research at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 8:00 PM, Dario Strbenac <
>> dstr7320 at uni.sydney.edu.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Good day,
>> >
>> > It might be useful to readers to have a comparison table (ticks and
>> > crosses) in the MultiAssayExperiment vignette that compares the features
>> > available in it to those available in SummarizedExperiment, to allow
>> > quicker decision making.
>> >
>>
>> Good point, this is worth adding. I think the decision can probably be
>> made
>> on one consideration: if it makes sense to represent all your assays by a
>> single set of rownames or row ranges, and a single set of colnames, then
>> you should use SummarizedExperiment. If your assays don't "match up" in
>> this way, then MultiAssayExperiment. Of course, the ExperimentList
>> elements
>> of a MultiAssayExperiment can be SummarizedExperiments...
>>
>>
>> --
>> Levi Waldron
>> http://www.waldronlab.org
>> Assistant Professor of Biostatistics CUNY School of Public Health
>> US: +1 646-364-9616 Skype:
>> levi.waldron
>>
>> [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bioc-devel at r-project.org mailing list
>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel
>>
>
>
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]