Deep learning applications in single-cell genomics and transcriptomics data analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditional bulk sequencing methods are limited to measuring the average signal in a group of cells, potentially masking heterogeneity, and rare populations. The single-cell resolution, however, enhances our understanding of complex biological systems and diseases, such as cancer, the immune system, and chronic diseases. However, the single-cell technologies generate massive amounts of data that are often high-dimensional, sparse, and complex, thus making analysis with traditional computational approaches difficult and unfeasible. To tackle these challenges, many are turning to deep learning (DL) methods as potential alternatives to the conventional machine learning (ML) algorithms for single-cell studies. DL is a branch of ML capable of extracting high-level features from raw inputs in multiple stages. Compared to traditional ML, DL models have provided significant improvements across many domains and applications. In this work, we examine DL applications in genomics, transcriptomics, spatial transcriptomics, and multi-omics integration, and address whether DL techniques will prove to be advantageous or if the single-cell omics domain poses unique challenges. Through a systematic literature review, we have found that DL has not yet revolutionized the most pressing challenges of the single-cell omics field. However, using DL models for single-cell omics has shown promising results (in many cases outperforming the previous state-of-the-art models) in data preprocessing and downstream analysis. Although developments of DL algorithms for single-cell omics have generally been gradual, recent advances reveal that DL can offer valuable resources in fast-tracking and advancing research in single-cell.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".