Built on sand: the shaky foundations of simulating single-cell RNA sequencing data

Abstract

With the emergence of hundreds of single-cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) datasets, the number of computational tools to analyse aspects of the generated data has grown rapidly. As a result, there is a recurring need to demonstrate whether newly developed methods are truly performant - on their own as well as in comparison to existing tools. Benchmark studies aim to consolidate the space of available methods for a given task, and often use simulated data that provide a ground truth for evaluations. Thus, demanding a high quality standard for synthetically generated data is critical to make simulation study results credible and transferable to real data. Here, we evaluated methods for synthetic scRNA-seq data generation in their ability to mimic experimental data. Besides comparing gene- and cell-level quality control summaries in both one- and two-dimensional settings, we further quantified these at the batch- and cluster-level. Secondly, we investigate the effect of simulators on clustering and batch correction method comparisons, and, thirdly, which and to what extent quality control summaries can capture reference-simulation similarity. Our results suggest that most simulators are unable to accommodate complex designs without introducing artificial effects; they yield over-optimistic performance of integration, and potentially unreliable ranking of clustering methods; and, it is generally unknown which summaries are important to ensure effective simulation-based method comparisons.