Chromatin structures from integrated AI and polymer physics model
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
The physical organization of the genome in three-dimensional space regulates many biological processes, including gene expression and cell differentiation. Three-dimensional characterization of genome structure is critical to understanding these biological processes. Direct experimental measurements of genome structure are challenging; computational models of chromatin structure are therefore necessary. We develop an approach that combines a particle-based chromatin polymer model, molecular simulation, and machine learning to efficiently and accurately estimate chromatin structure from indirect measures of genome structure. More specifically, we introduce a new approach where the interaction parameters of the polymer model are extracted from experimental Hi-C data using a graph neural network (GNN). We train the GNN on simulated data from the underlying polymer model, avoiding the need for large quantities of experimental data. The resulting approach accurately estimates chromatin structures across all chromosomes and across several experimental cell lines despite being trained almost exclusively on simulated data. The proposed approach can be viewed as a general framework for combining physical modeling with machine learning, and it could be extended to integrate additional biological data modalities. Ultimately, we achieve accurate and high-throughput estimations of chromatin structure from Hi-C data, which will be necessary as experimental methodologies, such as single-cell Hi-C, improve.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold
Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Žídek, A., Potapenko, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 · Cited by 43,764 · see citing works
Iterative correction of Hi-C data reveals hallmarks of chromosome organization
Imakaev, M., Fudenberg, G., McCord, R. P., Naumova, N., Goloborodko, A., Lajoie, B. R., Dekker, J., & Mirny, L. A. (2012) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.2148 · Cited by 1,423 · see citing works
A structural biology community assessment of AlphaFold2 applications
Akdel, M., Pires, D. E. V., Pardo, E. P., Jänes, J., Zalevsky, A. O., Mészáros, B., Bryant, P., Good, L. L., Laskowski, R. A., Pozzati, G., et al. (2022) · Nature Structural & Molecular Biology · doi:10.1038/s41594-022-00849-w · Cited by 675 · see citing works
HiCRep: assessing the reproducibility of Hi-C data using a stratum-adjusted correlation coefficient
Yang, T., Zhang, F., Yardımcı, G. G., Song, F., Hardison, R. C., Noble, W. S., Yue, F., & Li, Q. (2017) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.220640.117 · Cited by 533 · cited 3× · see citing works
“SCC is the stratum-adjusted correlation coefficient [32].”
Chromatin alternates between A and B compartments at kilobase scale for subgenic organization
Harris, H. L., Gu, H., Olshansky, M., Wang, A., Farabella, I., Eliaz, Y., Kalluchi, A., Krishna, A., Jacobs, M., Cauer, G., et al. (2023) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-38429-1 · Cited by 184 · see citing works
Robust single-cell Hi-C clustering by convolution- and random-walk-based imputation
Zhou, J., Ma, J., Chen, Y., Cheng, C., Bao, B., Peng, J., Sejnowski, T. J., Dixon, J. R., & Ecker, J. R. (2019) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1901423116 · Cited by 180 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Schultz, E. R., Kyhl, S., Willett, R., & de Pablo, J. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Chicago (US)
- Venue
- PLOS Computational Biology
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2025-04-09
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- e1012912
- ISSN
- 1553-734X (ISSN-L)
- 1553-7358
- PMC
- PMC12005555
- OpenAlex
- W4409311852
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 2
- FWCI
- 1.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- new_version (2025-04-17)
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- PLoS Computational Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Knowledge@UChicago (University of Chicago) (submittedVersion)
- University of Chicago (cc-by)
- Funders
- Division of Mathematical Sciences (DMS-2023109, DMS-AWD00000326)
- Division of Physics (PHY2317138)
- Simons Foundation (MP-TMPS-00005320)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
- Keywords
- chromatin structure, 3D genome organization, Hi-C data, graph neural networks, single-cell Hi-C
- MeSH terms
- Machine Learning, Chromatin, Computer Simulation, Humans, Models, Molecular, Polymers, Neural Networks, Computer, Computational Biology
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review