-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update FlowSOM dependency #73
Comments
ping @berombau I like the idea of using the official FlowSOM, but I'd be curious how it compares to @burtonrj's implementation in terms of speed. We could keep a wrapper in pytometry for visibility and backwards-compatibility that requires flowSOM as an optional dependency. Refering to it (including some of it's nice visualization) in the tutorial/documentation sounds good to me. |
Since FlowSOM_Python is implemented by the original authors and integrated within the scverse ecosystem, it makes sense to use it. The solution proposed by @grst sounds good to me! And it would also be great to check if the results are consistent for the two packages, but this requires quite some work. |
Hi everyone, thank you for the discussion. We're ok with these proposed actions. The flowsom package itself depends on pytometry currently for a function The current implementation depends on Numba for speed. There is ongoing work on a batched SOM training update that would further increase parallelization, which we hope to conclude by the summer. Alternative versions can reuse the scverse integration and visualizations of our package by implementing |
I added some of these changes in https://github.com/saeyslab/FlowSOM_Python/tree/interop-pytometry in preparation for a 0.0.2 version. The pytometry package is now an additional install as explained in the notebook. We do require the 0.1.5 version not yet released on PyPI #69. |
Hi @berombau |
Hi @berombau |
So in FlowSOM_Python we need the 0.1.5 version for the pytometry function |
@mbuttner would it kindly be possible to make that 0.1.6 release? |
@Zethson thanks for the nudge. I'll see to it tomorrow. |
I added a 0.1.6 release to PyPI and created a new release tag here on Github. |
Hi @berombau |
Hi everyone,
following a brief discussion with @burtonrj in #71: There is a Python implementation of
FlowSOM
by the original authors (https://github.com/saeyslab/FlowSOM_Python), which offers a comprehensive functionality of FlowSOM clustering and effectively carried over the functionality of theFlowSOM
R package. It depends onscVerse
packages likepytometry
andMuData
. Thepytometry
package currently uses @burtonrj's implementation of FlowSOM, which depends on the packagesminiSOM
andconsensusclustering
. Hence, we have two parallel implementations here, where efforts could be more integrated, and second, we would like to reduce the number of dependencies inpytometry
(see #64) as part of the governance strategy.Possible actions
@burtonrj suggested to
FlowSOM
functionality frompytometry
and thereforeconsensusclustering
andminisom
.FlowSOM
implementation of @saeyslab and add documentation accordingly.As a perspective, one should start a discussion about the integration of the
FlowSOM
package in thescverse
.I am happy with this suggestion in general and like to suggest some modifications to provide continuity for all users who are already using the current FlowSOM implementation in
pytometry
:consensusclustering
andminisom
optional dependencies in the next version.consensusclustering
and replace current example with a pointer to theFlowSOM
python package.I'd like to hear @grst and @quentinblampey thoughts on this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: