  RNA-Seq is a widely-used method for studying the behavior of genes under
different biological conditions. An essential step in an RNA-Seq study is
normalization, in which raw data are adjusted to account for factors that
prevent direct comparison of expression measures. Errors in normalization can
have a significant impact on downstream analysis, such as inflated false
positives in differential expression analysis. An under-emphasized feature of
normalization is the assumptions upon which the methods rely and how the
validity of these assumptions can have a substantial impact on the performance
of the methods. In this paper, we explain how assumptions provide the link
between raw RNA-Seq read counts and meaningful measures of gene expression. We
examine normalization methods from the perspective of their assumptions, as an
understanding of methodological assumptions is necessary for choosing methods
appropriate for the data at hand. Furthermore, we discuss why normalization
methods perform poorly when their assumptions are violated and how this causes
problems in subsequent analysis. To analyze a biological experiment,
researchers must select a normalization method with assumptions that are met
and that produces a meaningful measure of expression for the given experiment.
