In silico generation of synthetic cancer genomes using generative AI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding how genomic alterations drive cancer is key to advancing precision oncology. To detect these alterations, accurate algorithms are used; however, due to privacy concerns, few deeply sequenced cancer genomes can be shared, limiting benchmarking and representing a major obstacle to the improvement of analytic tools. To address this, we developed OncoGAN, a generative AI model combining adversarial networks and variational autoencoders to create realistic synthetic cancer genomes. Trained on large-scale genomic datasets, OncoGAN accurately reproduces somatic mutations, copy number alterations, and structural variants across cancer types while preserving donors' privacy. The synthetic genomes reflect tumor-specific mutational signatures and positional mutation patterns. Using DeepTumour, we validated the synthetic data's fidelity, showing high concordance between generated and predicted tumors. Moreover, augmenting the training data with synthetic genomes improved DeepTumour's accuracy, underscoring OncoGAN's potential to generate shareable datasets with known ground truths for benchmarking and enhancement of cancer genome analysis tools.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".