Hidden sampling biases inflate performance in gene regulatory network inference
This study identifies and quantifies sampling biases within gene regulatory network inference methods, demonstrating how these biases can lead to inflated performance metrics and inaccurate conclusions.
One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works
The paper studied why machine learning models for gene regulatory network (GRN) inference from single-cell transcriptomic data often report high accuracy that may not reflect realistic biological settings, focusing specifically on how negative regulatory interactions are sampled during supervised training and evaluation. Across multiple GRN benchmarking datasets, the authors found that common sampling strategies introduce node-degree biases that let models use trivial graph-structural cues rather than biological regulatory signals, and under these biased protocols, simple degree-based heuristics could match or exceed state-of-the-art graph neural network methods. The paper introduces a degree-aware sampling approach intended to remove these artifacts and yield more reliable performance assessments. The paper does not explicitly discuss endometriosis or adenomyosis; it was included in the corpus via a keyword match in the upstream search index.
Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works
Abstract
Full text
1,207 characters
· extracted from
oa-doi-fallback
· click to expand
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)
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