N. Brouwer
Please Note
5 records found
1
Comparative Analysis of Geneformer and Traditional Machine Learning Techniques in Predicting Perturbation Combination Efficacy on Cancer Cell Lines
An Empirical Evaluation Using the sciplex2 Dataset
The research involves preprocessing the sciplex2 dataset, training the models, and evaluating their performance in binary classification of cells as either treated or untreated, and the prediction of gene perturbation impacts. While traditional ML models demonstrated higher accuracy in binary classification tasks, Geneformer excelled in predicting the impact of gene perturbations due to its advanced architecture and extensive pre-training on single-cell transcriptomes.
Key findings reveal that highly expression-correlated gene pairs cause the largest shifts in cell classification, underscoring the importance of gene correlations in biological predictions. Geneformer showed a deeper understanding of gene network dynamics, achieving higher maximum Cosine Shifts compared to PCA embeddings and placing less emphasis on highly differentially expressed (HDE) Single Genes. Instead, it focused on HDE Gene Pairs, indicating its potential ability to capture complex downstream effects of gene perturbations.
This study highlights the potential of integrating advanced deep learning models like Geneformer into drug discovery, offering a pathway for more effective and targeted therapeutic interventions. ...
The research involves preprocessing the sciplex2 dataset, training the models, and evaluating their performance in binary classification of cells as either treated or untreated, and the prediction of gene perturbation impacts. While traditional ML models demonstrated higher accuracy in binary classification tasks, Geneformer excelled in predicting the impact of gene perturbations due to its advanced architecture and extensive pre-training on single-cell transcriptomes.
Key findings reveal that highly expression-correlated gene pairs cause the largest shifts in cell classification, underscoring the importance of gene correlations in biological predictions. Geneformer showed a deeper understanding of gene network dynamics, achieving higher maximum Cosine Shifts compared to PCA embeddings and placing less emphasis on highly differentially expressed (HDE) Single Genes. Instead, it focused on HDE Gene Pairs, indicating its potential ability to capture complex downstream effects of gene perturbations.
This study highlights the potential of integrating advanced deep learning models like Geneformer into drug discovery, offering a pathway for more effective and targeted therapeutic interventions.
As a cell, is it better to be single?
Exploring the feasibility of fine-tuning Geneformer on bulk RNA sequencing data
Strategies for Fine-Tuning Geneformer to Predict the Exposure Level of Cancer Cells to Treatments
A Comparison of Different Fine-Tuning Strategies for Foundation Models
Evaluating Machine Learning Approaches for Predicting Drug Response in Cancer Cells
A Comparative Analysis of Geneformer and Support Vector Machine
This paper investigates how Geneformer and SVM perform in predicting the treatment label of cells across different drugs and doses, which drug doses are suitable for conducting single-gene perturbation experiments, how accurately can these experiments replicate drug effects, and what are the differences in results between Geneformer and SVM regarding their ability to identify significant genes affecting drug response.
Results indicate that while SVM generally achieves higher accuracy in predicting treatment labels of cells, Geneformer demonstrates better capability in identifying genes whose perturbations mimic drug effects. Geneformer's embeddings show significant shifts towards treated cell states after single-gene perturbations, indicating a deeper understanding of gene interactions in drug response. On the other hand, SVM's predictions rely more on differential gene expression. This comparative analysis underscores the strengths and limitations of each approach in modelling complex biological systems and predicting the drug response of cancer cells. ...
This paper investigates how Geneformer and SVM perform in predicting the treatment label of cells across different drugs and doses, which drug doses are suitable for conducting single-gene perturbation experiments, how accurately can these experiments replicate drug effects, and what are the differences in results between Geneformer and SVM regarding their ability to identify significant genes affecting drug response.
Results indicate that while SVM generally achieves higher accuracy in predicting treatment labels of cells, Geneformer demonstrates better capability in identifying genes whose perturbations mimic drug effects. Geneformer's embeddings show significant shifts towards treated cell states after single-gene perturbations, indicating a deeper understanding of gene interactions in drug response. On the other hand, SVM's predictions rely more on differential gene expression. This comparative analysis underscores the strengths and limitations of each approach in modelling complex biological systems and predicting the drug response of cancer cells.