ReviewNature genetics2026
Toward generalizable and interpretable AI in regulatory genomics.
Review in Nature genetics, 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.
- AlphaGenome Atlas:medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- PoolParty: streamlined design of DNA sequence libraries in Python.bioRxiv : the preprint server for 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Deciphering how DNA sequence encodes gene regulation remains a central challenge in biology. Advances in machine learning and functional genomics have enabled sequence-to-function (seq2func) models that predict molecular regulatory readouts directly from DNA sequence, supporting variant effect prediction, mechanistic interpretation and regulatory sequence design. Despite strong performance on held-out genomic regions, generalization across genetic variation and cellular contexts remains inconsistent. In this Review, we examine how model architectures, training data and prediction tasks shape model behavior. We also synthesize how interpretability methods and evaluation practices have elucidated cis-regulatory organization and highlighted systematic failure modes, clarifying why strong predictive accuracy can fail to translate into robust regulatory understanding. Thus, we suggest that progress requires reframing seq2func models as continually refined systems, in which targeted perturbation experiments, systematic evaluation and iterative model updates are tightly coupled through artificial intelligence-experiment feedback loops, enabling self-improving models that progressively deepen mechanistic understanding and more reliably support biological discovery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42509369What 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.