PertEval-scFM: Benchmarking Single-Cell Foundation Models for Perturbation Effect Prediction
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In silico modeling of transcriptional responses to perturbations is crucial for advancing our understanding of cellular processes and disease mechanisms. We present PertEval-scFM, a standardized framework designed to evaluate models for perturbation effect prediction. We apply PertEval-scFM to benchmark zero-shot single-cell foundation model (scFM) embeddings against base-line models to assess whether these contextualized representations enhance perturbation effect prediction. Our results show that scFM embeddings do not provide consistent improvements over baseline models, especially under distribution shift. Overall, this study provides a systematic evaluation of zero-shot scFM embeddings for perturbation effect prediction, highlighting the challenges of this task and revealing the limitations of current-generation scFMs. Our findings underscore the need for specialized models and high-quality datasets that capture a broader range of cellular states. Source code and documentation can be found at: https://github.com/aaronwtr/PertEval .
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it