Benchmarking gene embeddings from sequence, expression, network, and text models for functional prediction tasks

preprint OA: closed
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher
Full text 1,556 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Abstract Accurate, data-driven representations of genes are critical for interpreting high-throughput biological data, yet no consensus exists on the most effective embedding strategy for common functional prediction tasks. Here, we present a systematic comparison of 38 gene embedding methods derived from amino acid sequences, gene expression profiles, protein–protein interaction networks, and biomedical literature. We benchmark each approach across three classes of tasks: predicting individual gene attributes, characterizing paired gene interactions, and assessing gene set relationships while trying to control for data leakage. Overall, we find that literature-based embeddings deliver superior performance across prediction tasks, sequence-based models excel in genetic interaction predictions, and expression-derived representations are well-suited for disease-related associations. Interestingly, network embeddings achieve similar performance to literature-based embeddings on most tasks despite using significantly smaller training sets. The type of training data has a greater influence on performance than the specific embedding construction method, with embedding dimensionality having only minimal impact. Our benchmarks clarify the strengths and limitations of current gene embeddings, providing practical guidance for selecting representations for downstream biological applications. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. Footnotes Fig 1-5 revised; additional results; Supplemental files updated.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00