ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2026
Biologically informed neural network models are robust to spurious interactions via self-pruning.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Zero-shot prediction of drug responses using biologically informed neural networks trained on phosphoproteomic timeseries.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
motivationComputational models of cellular networks hold promise to uncover disease mechanisms and guide therapeutic strategies. Biology-informed neural networks (BINNs) is an emerging approach to create such models by combining the predictive power of deep learning with prior knowledge, a vital aspect of biological research. The architectures of BINN's enforces a network structure from which mechanism can ideally be inferred. However, a key challenge is to evaluate the reliability of these models, as cells are inherently complex, involving intricate and sometimes unknown interactions. Currently, analysis mainly focuses on selected pathways rather than a more comprehensive perspective.
resultsIn this work we demonstrate an alternative holistic approach: we measure to which extent purposefully introduced spurious interactions are down-weighted by a BINN during training (self-pruning). The metric suggested RRA (Relative Residual Area) allows for direct distribution comparison with perfect self-pruning achieved at zero and a failure to self-prune if above one. To enable rapid testing, we updated LEMBAS (Large-scale knowledge-EMBedded Artificial Signaling-networks), our recurrent neural network framework for intracellular signaling dynamics, with full GPU acceleration. Our implementation achieves a > 7-fold speedup compared to the original while preserving predictive accuracy. We evaluated self-pruning in 3 different datasets and found that when spurious interactions are introduced at random, the model prunes these to a larger extent than those from the prior knowledge network (PKN), provided the model is regularized with a sufficiently large L2 norm. This suggests that BINNs can be robust to uncertainty in the PKN. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Our implementation of LEMBAS is freely available under a MIT license at https://github.com/AvlantNilssonLab/LEMBAS_GPU. The models and results to generate the figures can be downloaded through https://zenodo.org/records/17425598.
Indexed as
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.