ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
Benchmarking DNA Foundation Models for Genomic Sequence Classification.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Disease-Specific Prediction of Missense Variant Pathogenicity with DNA Language Models and Graph Neural Networks.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- NextVir: Enabling classification of tumor-causing viruses with genomic foundation models.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The rapid advancement of DNA foundation language models has revolutionized the field of genomics, enabling the decoding of complex patterns and regulatory mechanisms within DNA sequences. However, the current evaluation of these models often relies on fine-tuning and limited datasets, which introduces biases and limits the assessment of their true potential. Here, we present a benchmarking study of three recent DNA foundation language models, including DNABERT-2, Nucleotide Transformer version-2 (NT-v2), and HyenaDNA, focusing on the quality of their zero-shot embeddings across a diverse range of genomic tasks and species through analyses of 57 real datasets. We found that DNABERT-2 exhibits the most consistent performance across human genome-related tasks, while NT-v2 excels in epigenetic modification detection. HyenaDNA stands out for its exceptional runtime scalability and ability to handle long input sequences. Importantly, we demonstrate that using mean token embedding consistently improves the performance of all three models compared to the default setting of sentence-level summary token embedding, with average AUC improvements ranging from 4.3% to 9.7% for different DNA foundation models. Furthermore, the performance differences between these models are significantly reduced when using mean token embedding. Our findings provide a framework for selecting and optimizing DNA language models, guiding researchers in applying these tools effectively in genomic studies.
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.