GAME: Genomic API for Model Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rapid expansion of genomics datasets and the application of machine learning has produced sequence-to-activity genomics models with ever-expanding capabilities. However, benchmarking these models on practical applications has been challenging because individual projects evaluate their models in ad hoc ways, and there is substantial heterogeneity of both model architectures and benchmarking tasks. To address this challenge, we have created GAME, a system for large-scale, community-led standardized model benchmarking on user-defined evaluation tasks. We borrow concepts from the Application Programming Interface (API) paradigm to allow for seamless communication between pre-trained models and benchmarking tasks, ensuring consistent evaluation protocols. Because all models and benchmarks are inherently compatible in this framework, the continual addition of new models and new benchmarks is easy. We also developed a Matcher module powered by a large language model (LLM) to automate ambiguous task alignment between benchmarks and models. Containerization of these modules enhances reproducibility and facilitates the deployment of models and benchmarks across computing platforms. By focusing on predicting underlying biochemical phenomena (e.g. gene expression, open chromatin, DNA binding), we ensure that tasks remain technology-independent. We provide examples of benchmarks and models implementing this framework, and anticipate that the community will contribute their own, leading to an ever-expanding and evolving set of models and evaluation tasks. This resource will accelerate genomics research by illuminating the best models for a given task, motivating novel functional genomic benchmarks, and providing a more nuanced understanding of model abilities.
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 | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.055 | 0.031 |
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".