ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2026
Sparsity is all you need: rethinking biologically informed neural networks.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Biologically informed neural networks are increasingly adopted in bioinformatics under the premise that embedding biological knowledge into model architectures yields more accurate and interpretable predictions. This approach has driven a growing literature of pathway-informed models aiming to move beyond black-box learning by explicitly encoding biological structure. However, it remains unclear whether these models exploit biological knowledge or instead benefit from a different inductive bias. Here, we systematically investigate this question across 29 state-of-the-art pathway-informed neural networks by explicitly decoupling biological annotations from network architecture. For each evaluable model, we implement a structure-matched randomization protocol, in which pathway annotations are replaced with random associations while preserving sparsity and architectural constraints, allowing for a direct comparison under controlled conditions. Across multiple prediction tasks, datasets, and evaluation metrics, the randomized models consistently match or outperform their biologically informed counterparts. Moreover, pathway-informed models show no systematic advantage in interpretability: randomized models recover disease-associated biomarkers with comparable accuracy and yield highly correlated feature rankings. Our results reveal that the performance gains commonly attributed to biological pathway integration arise predominantly from sparsity-induced regularization rather than from biological knowledge itself. We provide a general evaluation workflow to test whether biological priors contribute predictive information beyond sparsity, offering practical guidance for the development of biology-aware neural networks. The code implementing the proposed methodology is available on GitHub at https://github.com/compbiomed-unito/Pathway_Randomization.
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.