A deep generative model for deciphering cellular dynamics and in silico drug discovery in complex diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human diseases are characterized by intricate cellular dynamics. Single-cell transcriptomics provides critical insights, yet a persistent gap remains in computational tools for detailed disease progression analysis and targeted in silico drug interventions. Here we introduce UNAGI, a deep generative neural network tailored to analyse time-series single-cell transcriptomic data. This tool captures the complex cellular dynamics underlying disease progression, enhancing drug perturbation modelling and screening. When applied to a dataset from patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, UNAGI learns disease-informed cell embeddings that sharpen our understanding of disease progression, leading to the identification of potential therapeutic drug candidates. Validation using proteomics reveals the accuracy of UNAGI's cellular dynamics analysis, and the use of the fibrotic cocktail-treated human precision-cut lung slices confirms UNAGI's predictions that nifedipine, an antihypertensive drug, may have anti-fibrotic effects on human tissues. UNAGI's versatility extends to other diseases, including COVID, demonstrating adaptability and confirming its broader applicability in decoding complex cellular dynamics beyond idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, amplifying its use in the quest for therapeutic solutions across diverse pathological landscapes.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".