Beyond benchmarking: an expert-guided consensus approach to spatially aware clustering
Jieran SuniD, Kirti BiharieiD, Peiying CaiiD, Niklas Müller‐BötticheriD, Paul KießlingiD, Meghan A. TurneriD, Søren Helweg DamiD, Florian HeyliD, Sarusan Kathirchelvan, Martin EmonsiD, Samuel GunziD, Sven Olaf TwardziokiD, Amin El HeliebiiD, Martin ZachariasiD, SpaceHack 2.0 participants, Fadhl AlakwaaiD, Shahul AlamiD, Maria Calleja, Yuzhou Chang, Thomas ChartrandiD, Nigel ChouiD, Estella Y. Dong, Michael Fletcher, George Gavriilidis, Alexander KanitziD, , Naveed IshaqueiD
Abstract
Spatial omics technologies have revolutionized the study of tissue architecture and cellular heterogeneity by integrating molecular profiles with spatial localization. In spatially resolved transcriptomics, delineating higher-order anatomical structures is critical for understanding how cellular organization affects tissue and organ function. Since 2020, more than 50 spatially aware clustering (SAC) methods have been developed for this purpose. However, the reliability of current benchmarks is undermined by their narrow focus on Visium and brain tissue datasets, as well as incorrect interpretation of manual annotation as ground truth. Here, we present SACCELERATOR, a community-driven, extensible framework that standardizes data formatting, method integration, and metric evaluation, and is designed to rapidly incorporate new methods and datasets. SACCELERATOR currently includes 22 SAC methods applied to 15 datasets spanning 9 technologies and diverse tissue types. Our analysis revealed substantial limitations in the generalizability and reproducibility of SAC methods across tissues and platforms. We also demonstrate that anatomical labels commonly used as ground truths are often biased, potentially error-prone, and, in some cases, unsuitable for benchmarking efforts. Rather than scoring and comparing methods, we propose a consensus-guided workflow that aggregates clustering results to generate consensus representations. Descriptive spatial metrics highlight areas of high entropy where method disagreement is highest, enabling targeted feedback for tissue experts. Applied to brain and cancer datasets, this approach uncovered biologically meaningful patterns overlooked by individual methods and manual annotations. Our results underscore the need for iterative, expert-in-the-loop analysis and reveal that traditional evaluation metrics do not always capture the subjective qualities of results. By improving tissue annotation and addressing key benchmarking limitations, SACCELERATOR provides a robust foundation for advancing spatial omics research.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 5
- FWCI
- 8.32
- Field percentile
- top 3%
- Organism
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- STEAM: Spatial Transcriptomics Evaluation Algorithm and Metric for clustering performance
Samantha Reynoso, Courtney T. Schiebout, … Fan Zhang·Briefings in BioinformaticsPeer-reviewed·Aug 31, 2025
- Benchmarking clustering, alignment, and integration methods for spatial transcriptomics
- An explanatory benchmark of spatial domain detection reveals key drivers of method performance
Alice Descoeudres, Tomislav Prusina, … Stefan Canzar·bioRxiv·Mar 16, 2026
- STCC: consensus clustering enhances spatial domain detection for spatial transcriptomics data
Congcong Hu, Nana Wei, … Xiaoqi Zheng·bioRxiv·Feb 25, 2024
- A Comprehensive Benchmarking of Spatial Deconvolution andDomain Detection Methods across Diverse Tissues and SpatialTranscriptomic Technologies
Ajita Shree, Aditya V, … Hamim Zafar·bioRxiv·May 13, 2026
- Systematic comparison of sequencing-based spatial transcriptomic methods
Yue You, Yuting Fu, … Luyi Tian·Nature MethodsPeer-reviewed·Jul 4, 2024