ArticleGenome biology2026
scArchon: a scalable benchmarking framework for assessing single-cell perturbation models.
Article in Genome biology, 2026. 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.
- Review
- scArchon: a scalable benchmarking framework for assessing single-cell perturbation models.Genome biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe accurate prediction of cellular responses to perturbations, such as drug treatments, remains a pivotal challenge in single-cell transcriptomics. While numerous deep learning tools have been developed for this task, their systematic benchmarking across diverse datasets and performance metrics has been limited.
resultsHere, we present scArchon, a reproducible, modular benchmarking platform built on Snakemake. It is designed to evaluate perturbation response prediction tools in an unbiased and extensible manner. Employing six representative single-cell RNA-seq datasets, we compare leading methods such as scGen, CPA, trVAE, scPRAM, scVIDR, scDisInFact, SCREEN, scPreGAN, and CellOT against baselines. We assess model performance using a composite of statistical and biological metrics. Our analysis reveals heterogeneous performance. While methods like trVAE, scGen, scPRAM, and scVIDR achieve robust results across multiple datasets, other tools occasionally underperform even compared to linear or control baselines. Notably, models with favorable quantitative scores may fail to retain key biological perturbation signatures, underscoring the need for gene-level evaluation.
conclusionsscArchon provides a unified, extensible foundation for large-scale, standardized benchmarking of perturbation prediction tools, facilitating methodological transparency and accelerating development in this rapidly evolving field. We encourage adoption of scArchon and sharing of containerized tools to drive progress in single-cell perturbation modeling.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.