Artificial Intelligence in Ocular Transcriptomics: Applications of Unsupervised and Supervised Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transcriptomic profiling is a powerful tool for dissecting the cellular and molecular complexity of ocular tissues, providing insights into retinal development, corneal disease, macular degeneration, and glaucoma. With the expansion of microarray, bulk RNA sequencing (RNA-seq), and single-cell RNA-seq technologies, artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a key strategy for analyzing high-dimensional gene expression data. This review synthesizes AI-enabled transcriptomic studies in ophthalmology from 2019 to 2025, highlighting how supervised and unsupervised machine learning (ML) methods have advanced biomarker discovery, cell type classification, and eye development and ocular disease modeling. Here, we discuss unsupervised techniques, such as principal component analysis (PCA), t-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding (t-SNE), uniform manifold approximation and projection (UMAP), and weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA), now the standard in single-cell workflows. Supervised approaches are also discussed, including the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), support vector machines (SVMs), and random forests (RFs), and their utility in identifying diagnostic and prognostic markers in age-related macular degeneration (AMD), diabetic retinopathy (DR), glaucoma, keratoconus, thyroid eye disease, and posterior capsule opacification (PCO), as well as deep learning frameworks, such as variational autoencoders and neural networks that support multi-omics integration. Despite challenges in interpretability and standardization, explainable AI and multimodal approaches offer promising avenues for advancing precision ophthalmology.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".