Path-based reasoning for biomedical knowledge graphs with BioPathNet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding complex interactions in biomedical networks is crucial for advancements in biomedicine, but traditional link prediction (LP) methods are limited in capturing this complexity. Representation-based learning techniques improve prediction accuracy by mapping nodes to low-dimensional embeddings, yet they often struggle with interpretability and scalability. We present BioPathNet, a novel graph neural network framework based on the Neural Bellman-Ford Network (NBFNet), addressing these limitations through path-based reasoning for LP in biomedical knowledge graphs. Unlike node-embedding frameworks, BioPathNet learns representations between node pairs by considering all relations along paths, enhancing prediction accuracy and interpretability. This allows visualization of influential paths and facilitates biological validation. BioPathNet leverages a background regulatory graph (BRG) for enhanced message passing and uses stringent negative sampling to improve precision. In evaluations across various LP tasks, such as gene function annotation, drug-disease indication, synthetic lethality, and lncRNA-mRNA interaction prediction, BioPathNet consistently outperformed shallow node embedding methods, relational graph neural networks and task-specific state-of-the-art methods, demonstrating robust performance and versatility. Our study predicts novel drug indications for diseases like acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and Alzheimer's, validated by medical experts and clinical trials. We also identified new synthetic lethality gene pairs and regulatory interactions involving lncRNAs and target genes, confirmed through literature reviews. BioPathNet's interpretability will enable researchers to trace prediction paths and gain molecular insights, making it a valuable tool for drug discovery, personalized medicine and biology in general.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".