constants
The R package for CODATA constants rebuilt its symbol table on NIST's naming so future updates stop being hand work.
A side-by-side editorial comparison of qqman and treeshap — release velocity, themes, recent moves, and the top alternatives to consider.
The Manhattan-plot package for GWAS results, finished and dormant since 2017.
qqman does two things: manhattan() and qq() plots for genome-wide association study results. Its six visible releases run from 2014 to a single 2017 packaging fix, and the last release with any user-facing change shipped in 2015. The archive is non-monotonic — a 0.0.0 tag published after 0.1.1 archives the pre-package standalone script — so version order and publication order disagree.
treeshap keeps widening its tree-model coverage while the SHAP math stays put.
treeshap computes exact SHAP values for tree ensembles in R, reaching each modelling framework through a per-framework unify() adapter. Since returning to CRAN in 2023 it has added GPBoost, ranger survival forests and multi-output models to that adapter layer. Four releases in three years, each dominated by adapter work contributed by users of one specific framework.
qqman does two things: manhattan() and qq() plots for genome-wide association study results. Its six visible releases run from 2014 to a single 2017 packaging fix, and the last release with any user-facing change shipped in 2015. The archive is non-monotonic — a 0.0.0 tag published after 0.1.1 archives the pre-package standalone script — so version order and publication order disagree.
The real development window was 2014 to 2015. The 0.1.2 release did the substantive work, replacing the assumption that SNPs are evenly distributed across chromosomes and handing users control of axis limits, labels and log transformation; 0.1.3 then added annotation by p-value threshold and top-SNP-per-chromosome. After that the package stops. Notably, the archival 0.0.0 entry records that the original script had confidence intervals on QQ plots and richer highlighting than the released package ever regained.
With one packaging fix in the last decade, these entries support no prediction of further releases. The package reads as complete for its narrow purpose rather than abandoned mid-arc.
treeshap computes exact SHAP values for tree ensembles in R, reaching each modelling framework through a per-framework unify() adapter. Since returning to CRAN in 2023 it has added GPBoost, ranger survival forests and multi-output models to that adapter layer. Four releases in three years, each dominated by adapter work contributed by users of one specific framework.
The direction is breadth of model support rather than new explanation methods: every release since the first CRAN submission adds or repairs a unify() backend. Maintenance is community-driven, with named contributors fixing the framework they personally use. Nothing in these entries points at work on the SHAP algorithms themselves.
Expect the next release to add or repair another unify() adapter as a contributor brings their own framework, rather than to change how explanations are computed.
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 qqman or treeshap.
The R package for CODATA constants rebuilt its symbol table on NIST's naming so future updates stop being hand work.
The R client for AusTraits spends its releases chasing the dataset it reads.
A ggplot2 layer for seasonal adjustment output, filling in one plot type at a time.
A fossil-record simulator that quietly grew a trait-evolution engine.
Reference-based multiple imputation tables, shipping only what CRAN checks demand.
An MMRM tabulation package that has published nothing since its 2024 CRAN releases.
See all qqman alternatives → · See all treeshap alternatives →
Latest ship moves from both products, interleaved chronologically. ⚡ = editorial spark.
They serve adjacent needs but don't currently overlap on shipped themes. qqman and treeshap are shipping at a similar cadence (velocity 0.0 vs 0.0, both within Sparkpulse's "active" band). See the at-a-glance table above for a side-by-side breakdown of velocity, recent sparks, and editorial themes.
Sparkpulse doesn't pick a winner — we score release velocity, not feature parity. qqman and treeshap are shipping at a similar cadence (velocity 0.0 vs 0.0, both within Sparkpulse's "active" band). For your specific use case, the alternatives sections above list other Analytics products to evaluate alongside.
Top qqman alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "qqman alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/qqman-r for the full list with editorial commentary on each.
Top treeshap alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "treeshap alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/treeshap for the full list with editorial commentary on each.