Papers › Essential guidelines for computational method benchmarking

Essential guidelines for computational method benchmarking

3 Dec 2018arXiv:1812.00661archive 2025-07-28

Lukas M. Weber, Wouter Saelens, Robrecht Cannoodt, Charlotte Soneson, Alexander Hapfelmeier, Paul Gardner, Anne-Laure Boulesteix, Yvan Saeys, Mark D. Robinson

In computational biology and other sciences, researchers are frequently faced with a choice between several computational methods for performing data analyses. Benchmarking studies aim to rigorously compare the performance of different methods using well-characterized benchmark datasets, to determine the strengths of each method or to provide recommendations regarding the best choice of method for an analysis. However, benchmarking studies must be carefully designed and implemented to provide accurate and unbiased results. Here, we summarize key practical guidelines and recommendations for performing high-quality benchmarking analyses, based on our own experiences in computational biology.

PaperPDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

chloroExtractorTeam/benchmark mentioned on GitHubMIT report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Benchmarking

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections