NEST: Spatially-mapped cell-cell communication patterns using a deep learning-based attention mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Dysregulation of communication between cells mediates complex diseases such as cancer and diabetes. However, detecting cell-cell communication (CCC) at scale remains one of the greatest challenges in transcriptomics. While gene expression measured with single-cell RNA sequencing and spatial transcriptomics reinvigorated computational approaches to detecting CCC, most existing methods exhibit high false positive rates, do not integrate spatial proximity of ligand-receptor interactions, and cannot detect CCC between individual cells. We overcome these challenges by presenting NEST (NEural network on Spatial Transcriptomics) , which uses a graph attention network paired with an unsupervised contrastive learning approach to decipher patterns of communication while retaining the strength of each signal. We introduce new synthetic benchmarking experiments which demonstrate how NEST outperforms existing tools and detects biologically-relevant CCC along with directionality and confidence across spot- and cell-based technologies measuring several different tissues and diseases. In our applications, NEST identifies T-cell homing signals in human lymph nodes, aggressive cancer CCC in lung adenocarcinoma, and discovers new patterns of communication that act as relay networks in pancreatic cancer. Beyond two-dimensional data, we also highlight NEST’s ability to detect CCC in three-dimensional spatial transcriptomic data.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".