ArticleBioinformatics advances2023
Adversarial training improves model interpretability in single-cell RNA-seq analysis.
Article in Bioinformatics advances, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Discovering governing equations of biological systems through representation learning and sparse model discovery.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2025Article
- adverSCarial: assessing the vulnerability of single-cell RNA-sequencing classifiers to adversarial attacks.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Genomic privacy and security in the era of artificial intelligence and quantum computing.Discover computing · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motivation: Predictive computational models must be accurate, robust, and interpretable to be considered reliable in important areas such as biology and medicine. A sufficiently robust model should not have its output affected significantly by a slight change in the input. Also, these models should be able to explain how a decision is made to support user trust in the results. Efforts have been made to improve the robustness and interpretability of predictive computational models independently; however, the interaction of robustness and interpretability is poorly understood. Results: As an example task, we explore the computational prediction of cell type based on single-cell RNA-seq data and show that it can be made more robust by adversarially training a deep learning model. Surprisingly, we find this also leads to improved model interpretability, as measured by identifying genes important for classification using a range of standard interpretability methods. Our results suggest that adversarial training may be generally useful to improve deep learning robustness and interpretability and that it should be evaluated on a range of tasks. Availability and implementation: Our Python implementation of all analysis in this publication can be found at: https://github.com/MehrshadSD/robustness-interpretability. The analysis was conducted using numPy 0.2.5, pandas 2.0.3, scanpy 1.9.3, tensorflow 2.10.0, matplotlib 3.7.1, seaborn 0.12.2, sklearn 1.1.1, shap 0.42.0, lime 0.2.0.1, matplotlib_venn 0.11.9.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.