Learning immune cell differentiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY The mammalian genome contains several million cis-regulatory elements, whose differential activity marked by open chromatin determines organogenesis and differentiation. This activity is itself embedded in the DNA sequence, decoded by sequence-specific transcription factors. Leveraging a granular ATAC-seq atlas of chromatin activity across 81 immune cell-types we show that a convolutional neural network (“AI-TAC”) can learn to infer cell-type-specific chromatin activity solely from the DNA sequence. AI-TAC does so by rediscovering, with astonishing precision, binding motifs for known regulators, and some unknown ones, mapping them with high concordance to positions validated by ChIP-seq data. AI-TAC also uncovers combinatorial influences, establishing a hierarchy of transcription factors (TFs) and their interactions involved in immunocyte specification, with intriguingly different strategies between lineages. Mouse-trained AI-TAC can parse human DNA, revealing a strikingly similar ranking of influential TFs. Thus, Deep Learning can reveal the regulatory syntax that drives the full differentiative complexity of the immune system.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".