Papers › Online FDR Control for RNAseq Data

Online FDR Control for RNAseq Data

5 Jun 2022arXiv:2206.02213archive 2025-07-28

Lathan Liou, Milena Hornburg, David S. Robertson

Motivation: While the analysis of a single RNA sequencing (RNAseq) dataset has been well described in the literature, modern research workflows often have additional complexity in that related RNAseq experiments are performed sequentially over time. The simplest and most widely used analysis strategy ignores the temporal aspects and analyses each dataset separately. However, this can lead to substantial inflation of the overall false discovery rate (FDR). We propose applying recently developed methodology for online hypothesis testing to analyse sequential RNAseq experiments in a principled way, guaranteeing FDR control at all times while never changing past decisions. Results: We show that standard offline approaches have variable control of FDR of related RNAseq experiments over time and a naively composed approach may improperly change historic decisions. We demonstrate that the online FDR algorithms are a principled way to guarantee control of FDR. Furthermore, in certain simulation scenarios, we observe empirically that online approaches have comparable power to offline approaches. Availability and Implementation: The onlineFDR package is freely available at http: //www.bioconductor.org/packages/onlineFDR. Additional code used for the simulation studies can be found at https://github.com/latlio/onlinefdr_rnaseq_simulation

PaperPDFCode

Code

latlio/onlinefdr_rnaseq_simulation officialmentioned in paper 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.

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