STACAS
Single-cell batch correction that learned to use cell labels, then spent three releases chasing Seurat.
Comparison · Analytics
GeneNMF vs lstar
A side-by-side editorial comparison of GeneNMF and lstar — release velocity, themes, recent moves, and the top alternatives to consider.
Shared themes:single-cell-genomics
GeneNMF vs lstar: at a glance
What is GeneNMF?
GeneNMF rebuilt how it derives meta-programs, changing every result it had produced.
GeneNMF applies non-negative matrix factorization to single-cell expression data to find gene programs, then consolidates programs recurring across samples into meta-programs. Version 0.6.0 replaced the consolidation method: instead of reducing each program to a gene set and taking a consensus, it retains full gene weight vectors and compares them by cosine similarity. Later releases have built reporting and control around that core — a metaprogram composition matrix showing which samples contributed, custom signature databases for enrichment testing, and the ability to drop meta-programs from results.
What is lstar?
A single-cell data store commits to Zarr v3 and range-readable hosting across four language surfaces
lstar stores single-cell data behind one C++ core with Python, R and JS/WASM bindings, and ships a browser viewer that reads the store directly. Zarr v3 is now the default on-disk format across all four surfaces, with zstd compression and sharding that packs many chunks into fewer objects. Viewer stores are compressed per field and resolved at chunk granularity, so a hosted viewer fetches only what it displays. The tag stream carries both lstar and lstar-sc releases.
GeneNMF vs lstar: editorial side-by-side
GeneNMF
0.0ANALYTICS
GeneNMF rebuilt how it derives meta-programs, changing every result it had produced.
◆ Current state
GeneNMF applies non-negative matrix factorization to single-cell expression data to find gene programs, then consolidates programs recurring across samples into meta-programs. Version 0.6.0 replaced the consolidation method: instead of reducing each program to a gene set and taking a consensus, it retains full gene weight vectors and compares them by cosine similarity. Later releases have built reporting and control around that core — a metaprogram composition matrix showing which samples contributed, custom signature databases for enrichment testing, and the ability to drop meta-programs from results.
◆ Where it's heading
The package is moving from producing meta-programs to letting users interrogate and constrain how they were formed. Composition matrices, the drop function and downsampled similarity heatmaps all serve inspection rather than derivation. The parameters added alongside the 0.6.0 rewrite — specificity weighting, cumulative weight thresholds, confidence defined as the fraction of programs containing a gene — turn what were fixed internal choices into stated, tunable ones.
◆ Prediction
Recent releases have been fixes and compatibility work rather than method changes, so the core approach appears settled. The dependency on an RcppML version not on CRAN is the loose end most likely to force the next release.
lstar
5.0ANALYTICS
A single-cell data store commits to Zarr v3 and range-readable hosting across four language surfaces
◆ Current state
lstar stores single-cell data behind one C++ core with Python, R and JS/WASM bindings, and ships a browser viewer that reads the store directly. Zarr v3 is now the default on-disk format across all four surfaces, with zstd compression and sharding that packs many chunks into fewer objects. Viewer stores are compressed per field and resolved at chunk granularity, so a hosted viewer fetches only what it displays. The tag stream carries both lstar and lstar-sc releases.
◆ Where it's heading
The through-line is making a hosted store cheap to read. Sharding addresses the file-per-chunk explosion that makes many-chunk arrays awkward to host; per-field compression with chunk-granular resolution means colouring an embedding by one gene fetches one column rather than an array. The 0.2.x patches are the cost of maintaining four surfaces at once — a WASM heap crash that only browsers exercise, and a count-basis orientation defect where all three surfaces normalized in memory and none owned the on-disk layout.
◆ Prediction
The orientation bug's root cause — no surface owning the on-disk representation while all three normalized in memory — is the kind of gap that usually produces a validation or ownership change rather than another point fix.
Alternatives to GeneNMF and lstar
Other Analytics products tracked by Sparkpulse, ranked by recent ship velocity. Each card links to a full editorial trajectory and lets you pivot into a head-to-head comparison with either GeneNMF or lstar.
ggtrace
A debugger for ggplot2's internals, hardening its grip as the internals it traces keep moving.
kde1d
A univariate density estimator that added zero-inflated data and reopened its C++ API to do it.
svines
Stationary vine copulas for time series, released in lockstep with the rest of Nagler's vine stack.
gghighlight
A single-purpose ggplot2 extension that has spent six years tracking ggplot2 instead of growing.
rtrek
A Star Trek data package that became a Memory Alpha web client and has been patching scrapers ever since.
See all GeneNMF alternatives → · See all lstar alternatives →
Recent activity from GeneNMF and lstar
Latest ship moves from both products, interleaved chronologically. ⚡ = editorial spark.
- 21d agolstarViewer count-basis orientation fixed; existing stores need re-prep
- 26d agolstarWASM viewer crash on resizable heaps fixed
- 1mo agolstarlstar 0.2.0 ⚡
- 1mo agolstarMeasure state inferred from content, not slot name
- 11mo agoGeneNMFSingle-sample runs fixed; gene weight definition refined
- 1y agoGeneNMFMetaprogram composition exposed and custom signature DBs supported
- 1y agoGeneNMFSimilarity heatmap downsampling and meta-program removal
- 2y agoGeneNMFMeta-programs rebuilt on gene weight vectors and cosine similarity ⚡
- 2y agoGeneNMFFirst stable release published to CRAN
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between GeneNMF and lstar?
Both compete on the same themes — single-cell-genomics — within Analytics. lstar is currently shipping more aggressively (velocity 5.0 vs 0.0), with 0 editorial sparks in the last 30 days against 0. See the at-a-glance table above for a side-by-side breakdown of velocity, recent sparks, and editorial themes.
Is GeneNMF better than lstar?
Sparkpulse doesn't pick a winner — we score release velocity, not feature parity. lstar is currently shipping more aggressively (velocity 5.0 vs 0.0), with 0 editorial sparks in the last 30 days against 0. For your specific use case, the alternatives sections above list other Analytics products to evaluate alongside.
What are the best alternatives to GeneNMF?
Top GeneNMF alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "GeneNMF alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/genenmf for the full list with editorial commentary on each.
What are the best alternatives to lstar?
Top lstar alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "lstar alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/lstar for the full list with editorial commentary on each.