A unified model for interpretable latent embedding of multi-sample, multi-condition single-cell data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Single-cell analysis across multiple samples and conditions requires quantitative modeling of the interplay between the continuum of cell states and the technical and biological sources of sample-to-sample variability. We introduce GEDI, a generative model that identifies latent space variations in multi-sample, multi-condition single-cell datasets and attributes them to sample-level covariates. GEDI enables cross-sample cell state mapping on par with state-of-the-art integration methods, cluster-free differential gene expression analysis along the continuum of cell states, and machine learning-based prediction of sample characteristics from single-cell data. GEDI can also incorporate gene-level prior knowledge to infer pathway and regulatory network activities in single cells. Finally, GEDI extends all these concepts to previously unexplored modalities that require joint consideration of dual measurements, such as the joint analysis of exon inclusion/exclusion reads to model alternative cassette exon splicing, or spliced/unspliced reads to model the mRNA stability landscapes of single cells.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".