ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
GAME: Genomic API for Model Evaluation.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
33 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The rapid expansion of genomics datasets and the application of machine learning has produced sequence-to-activity genomics models with ever-expanding capabilities. However, benchmarking these models on practical applications has been challenging because individual projects evaluate their models in ad hoc ways, and there is substantial heterogeneity of both model architectures and benchmarking tasks. To address this challenge, we have created GAME, a system for large-scale, community-led standardized model benchmarking on user-defined evaluation tasks. We borrow concepts from the Application Programming Interface (API) paradigm to allow for seamless communication between pre-trained models and benchmarking tasks, ensuring consistent evaluation protocols. Because all models and benchmarks are inherently compatible in this framework, the continual addition of new models and new benchmarks is easy. We also developed a Matcher module powered by a large language model (LLM) to automate ambiguous task alignment between benchmarks and models. Containerization of these modules enhances reproducibility and facilitates the deployment of models and benchmarks across computing platforms. By focusing on predicting underlying biochemical phenomena (e.g. gene expression, open chromatin, DNA binding), we ensure that tasks remain technology-independent. We provide examples of benchmarks and models implementing this framework, and anticipate that the community will contribute their own, leading to an ever-expanding and evolving set of models and evaluation tasks. This resource will accelerate genomics research by illuminating the best models for a given task, motivating novel functional genomic benchmarks, and providing a more nuanced understanding of model abilities.
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.