The DOI matches its DataCite record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Diversity by Design: Addressing Mode Collapse Improves scRNA-seq Perturbation Modeling on Well-Calibrated Metrics
Open accessAbstract
Recent benchmarks reveal that models for single-cell perturbation response are often outperformed by simply predicting the dataset mean. We trace this anomaly to a metric artifact: control-referenced deltas and unweighted error metrics reward mode collapse whenever the control is biased or the biological signal is sparse. Large-scale \textit{in silico} simulations and analysis of two real-world perturbation datasets confirm that shared reference shifts, not genuine biological change, drives high performance in these evaluations. We introduce differentially expressed gene (DEG)-aware metrics, weighted mean-squared error (WMSE) and weighted delta $R^{2}$ ($R^{2}_{w}(Δ)$) with respect to all perturbations, that measure error in niche signals with high sensitivity. We further introduce negative and positive performance baselines to calibrate these metrics. With these improvements, the mean baseline sinks to null performance while genuine predictors are correctly rewarded. Finally, we show that using WMSE as a loss function reduces mode collapse and improves model performance.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Standard perturbation metrics can overestimate biological prediction accuracy and metric design remains a critical challenge for virtual-cell benchmarking.
“These observations are consistent with recent work showing that standard perturbation metrics can overestimate biological prediction accuracy and that metric design remains a critical challenge for virtual-cell benchmarking (26, 30, 31).”
From A systematic comparison of single-cell perturbation response prediction models (2026) · cites this paper as [30]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
PerturBench: Benchmarking Machine Learning Models for Cellular Perturbation Analysis
Wu, Y., Wershof, E., Schmon, S. M., Nassar, M., Osiński, B., Eksi, R., Yan, Z., Stark, R., Zhang, K., & Graepel, T. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2408.10609 · Cited by 20
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 23
- Ahlmann-Eltze, C., Huber, W., and Anders, S. Deep learning-based predictions of gene perturbation effects do not yet outperform simple linear methods. BioRxiv , pp. 2024-09, 2024.
- Bendidi, I., Whitfield, S., Kenyon-Dean, K., Yedder, H. B., Mesbahi, Y. E., Noutahi, E., and Denton, A. K. Benchmarking transcriptomics foundation models for perturbation analysis: one pca still rules them all. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.13956 , 2024. · arXiv
- Csendes, G., Sanz, G., Szalay, K. Z., and Szalai, B. Benchmarking foundation cell models for post-perturbation rnaseq prediction. BMC genomics , 26(1):393, 2025.
- Cui, H., Wang, C., Maan, H., Pang, K., Luo, F., Duan, N., and Wang, B. scgpt: toward building a foundation model for single-cell multi-omics using generative ai. Nature Methods , 21(8):1470-1480, 2024.
- Dixit, A., Parnas, O., Li, B., Chen, J., Fulco, C. P., JerbyArnon, L., Marjanovic, N. D., Dionne, D., Burks, T., Raychowdhury, R., et al. Perturb-seq: dissecting molecular circuits with scalable single-cell rna profiling of pooled genetic screens. cell , 167(7):1853-1866, 2016.
- Gong, J., Hao, M., Cheng, X., Zeng, X., Liu, C., Ma, J., Zhang, X., Wang, T., and Song, L. xtrimogene: an efficient and scalable representation learner for single-cell rna-seq data. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 36:69391-69403, 2023.
- Hao, M., Gong, J., Zeng, X., Liu, C., Guo, Y., Cheng, X., Wang, T., Ma, J., Zhang, X., and Song, L. Large-scale foundation model on single-cell transcriptomics. Nature methods , 21(8):1481-1491, 2024.
- Istrate, A.-M., Li, D., and Karaletsos, T. scgenept: Is language all you need for modeling single-cell perturbations? bioRxiv , pp. 2024-10, 2024.
- Kamimoto, K., Stringa, B., Hoffmann, C. M., Jindal, K., Solnica-Krezel, L., and Morris, S. A. Dissecting cell identity via network inference and in silico gene perturbation. Nature , 614(7949):742-751, 2023.
- Li, C., Gao, H., She, Y., Bian, H., Chen, Q., Liu, K., Wei, L., and Zhang, X. Benchmarking ai models for in silico gene perturbation of cells. bioRxiv , pp. 2024-12, 2024a.
- Li, L., You, Y., Liao, W., Fan, X., Lu, S., Cao, Y., Li, B., Ren, W., Fu, Y., Kong, J., et al. A systematic comparison of single-cell perturbation response prediction models. bioRxiv , pp. 2024-12, 2024b.
- Lopez, R., Regier, J., Cole, M. B., Jordan, M. I., and Yosef, N. Deep generative modeling for single-cell transcriptomics. Nature methods , 15(12):1053-1058, 2018.
- Lotfollahi, M., Wolf, F. A., and Theis, F. J. scgen predicts single-cell perturbation responses. Nature methods , 16 (8):715-721, 2019.
- Lotfollahi, M., Klimovskaia Susmelj, A., De Donno, C., Hetzel, L., Ji, Y ., Ibarra, I. L., Srivatsan, S. R., Naghipourfar, M., Daza, R. M., Martin, B., et al. Predicting cellular responses to complex perturbations in high-throughput screens. Molecular systems biology , 19(6):e11517, 2023.
- Nadig, A., Replogle, J. M., Pogson, A. N., Murthy, M., McCarroll, S. A., Weissman, J. S., Robinson, E. B., and O'Connor, L. J. Transcriptome-wide analysis of differential expression in perturbation atlases. Nature Genetics , pp. 1-10, 2025.
- Norman, T. M., Horlbeck, M. A., Replogle, J. M., Ge, A. Y., Xu, A., Jost, M., Gilbert, L. A., and Weissman, J. S. Exploring genetic interaction manifolds constructed from rich single-cell phenotypes. Science , 365(6455):786-793, 2019.
- Peidli, S., Green, T. D., Shen, C., Gross, T., Min, J., Garda, S., Yuan, B., Schumacher, L. J., Taylor-King, J. P., Marks, D. S., et al. scperturb: harmonized single-cell perturbation data. Nature Methods , 21(3):531-540, 2024.
- Replogle, J. M., Saunders, R. A., Pogson, A. N., Hussmann, J. A., Lenail, A., Guna, A., Mascibroda, L., Wagner, E. J., Adelman, K., Lithwick-Yanai, G., et al. Mapping information-rich genotype-phenotype landscapes with genome-scale perturb-seq. Cell , 185(14):2559-2575, 2022.
- Roohani, Y., Huang, K., and Leskovec, J. Predicting transcriptional outcomes of novel multigene perturbations with gears. Nature Biotechnology , 42(6):927-935, 2024.
- Rosen, Y., Roohani, Y., Agarwal, A., Samotorˇ can, L., Consortium, T. S., Quake, S. R., and Leskovec, J. Universal cell embeddings: A foundation model for cell biology. bioRxiv , pp. 2023-11, 2023.
- Tang, Z., Zhou, M., Zhang, K., and Song, Q. scperb: Predict single-cell perturbation via style transfer-based variational autoencoder. Journal of Advanced Research , 2024.
- Theodoris, C. V., Xiao, L., Chopra, A., Chaffin, M. D., Al Sayed, Z. R., Hill, M. C., Mantineo, H., Brydon, E. M., Zeng, Z., Liu, X. S., et al. Transfer learning enables predictions in network biology. Nature , 618(7965):616624, 2023.
- Wenteler, A., Occhetta, M., Branson, N., Huebner, M., Curean, V., Dee, W., Connell, W., Hawkins-Hooker, A., Chung, P., Ektefaie, Y., et al. Perteval-scfm: Benchmarking single-cell foundation models for perturbation effect prediction. bioRxiv , pp. 2024-10, 2024.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Systematic Comparison of Single-Cell Perturbation Response Prediction Models
Li, L., You, Y., Fu, Y., Liao, W., Fan, X., Lu, S., Cao, Y., Li, B., Ren, W., Kong, J., et al. (2024) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2024.12.23.630036 · Cited by 25
A systematic comparison of single-cell perturbation response prediction models
Li, L., You, Y., Fu, Y., Liao, W., Fan, X., Lu, S., Cao, Y., Li, B., Ren, W., Kong, J., et al. (2026) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aed3414 · Cited by 1
Tiwari, K., Mahajan, G., Bellad, R., Dhruw, N. K., & Jha, A. (2026) · doi:10.64898/2026.10.16.759604
Metadata
- Authors
- Mejia, G. M., Miller, H. E., Leblanc, F. J. A., Wang, B., Swain, B., & Camillo, L. P. D. L.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2025
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2506.22641
- OpenAlex
- W4416504878
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Single-cell and spatial transcriptomics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene Regulatory Network Analysis
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
- Keywords
- mode collapse, single-cell RNA sequencing, evaluation metrics, differentially expressed genes, weighted mean squared error, performance baseline, loss function design
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