FateNet: an integration of dynamical systems and deep learning for cell fate prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Understanding cellular decision-making, particularly its timing and impact on the biological system such as tissue health and function, is a fundamental challenge in biology and medicine. Existing methods for inferring fate decisions and cellular state dynamics from single-cell RNA sequencing data lack precision regarding decision points and broader tissue implications. Addressing this gap, we present FateNet, a computational approach integrating dynamical systems theory and deep learning to probe the cell decision-making process using scRNA-seq data. By leveraging information about normal forms and scaling behavior near tipping pointscommon to many dynamical systems, FateNet accurately predicts cell decision occurrence and offers qualitative insights into the new state of the biological system. Also, through in-silico perturbation experiments, FateNet identifies key genes and pathways governing the differentiation process in hematopoiesis. Validated using different scRNA-seq data, FateNet emerges as a user-friendly and valuable tool for predicting critical points in biological processes, providing insights into complex trajectories.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".