Skip to content

Conversation

@lklossok
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

@lklossok lklossok requested a review from rdmorin May 13, 2025 20:29
R/umap.R Outdated
select(sample_id,V1,V2) %>%
column_to_rownames("sample_id")

train_labels = dplyr::filter(
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

By doing this instead of using train_projection$df you are trusting that the row order has not changed, which may not be true.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see, Ill fix this. Though I thought the lymphgen coulmn are truth labels that wouldnt change as they are linked to the sample_id and not V1 and V2

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes but the function may drop some rows so this would either cause a mismatch between sample and label or probably trigger an error if the lengths ended up different.

R/umap.R Outdated
conf_threshold = best_params$threshold,
na_label = "Other",
use_weights = best_params$use_w,
ignore_top = FALSE
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this can't be hard-coded. We should discuss

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

sounds good!


if(drop_unlabeled_from_training){
pred = dplyr::filter(pred,sample_id %in% test_df$sample_id)
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What is the point of this?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

if(drop_unlabeled_from_training){
pred = dplyr::filter(pred,sample_id %in% test_df$sample_id)
}

is now removed. I kept it from the original function predict_single_sample() as it appeared it had some sort of sanity checking functionality but now that you point it out it doesnt appear to have a purpose!

Copy link
Contributor

@rdmorin rdmorin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great start. Just a few comments and at least one change depending on how you respond to the comments

lklossok added 29 commits July 17, 2025 16:31
…elf, fully incorporated optimized_model to predict_single_sample
…n .rds for reproducibility, , , and also added to DLBCLone_save_optimized for reproducibility + running without error when running predict_single_sample
…w be used as test_df for training puposes reproducibly
…e_sample list output objects and adding necessary objects
…t to accept DLBCLone_KNN and DLBCLone_optimize_params list outputs
@rdmorin
Copy link
Contributor

rdmorin commented Oct 11, 2025

Is there anything in this PR that hasn't already made it into the Master branch? If not, @lklossok , can you close this PR?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants