ArticleeLife2026
Benchmarking biochemical networks generated by large language models.
Article in eLife, 2026. 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Computational models of biochemical networks provide frameworks for predicting how molecular cues guide cell decisions. These models are typically limited by the time-intensive manual curation required to extract network mechanisms from incomplete literature. Here, we test whether general-purpose large language models (LLMs) can generate accurate models of signaling and metabolic networks. We find that general-purpose LLMs generate 24-65% of the reactions of literature-curated signaling networks for cardiomyocyte hypertrophy, myofibroblast activation, and mechanosignaling. Further, logic-based models based on these networks predict responses to perturbations with accuracies of 6-33%. In the context of metabolic modeling, LLMs are able to generate 64-91% of the reactions within the core
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.