↓ Skip to main content

Why most Principal Component Analyses (PCA) in population genetic studies are wrong

Overview of attention for article published in bioRxiv
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric

Mentioned by

twitter
108 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Why most Principal Component Analyses (PCA) in population genetic studies are wrong
Published in
bioRxiv
DOI 10.1101/2021.04.11.439381
Authors

Elhaik, Eran

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 108 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 64. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 September 2023.
All research outputs
#640,243
of 24,878,531 outputs
Outputs from bioRxiv
#4,858
of 214,246 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,878,531 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 214,246 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.