ArticleBrain sciences2026
BioEdge-RGC: Compact Neural Policy Transfer from Model-Predictive Control in a Transcriptomics-Informed Optic Nerve Injury Simulation.
Article in Brain sciences, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesOptic nerve injury involves heterogeneous neuronal and microenvironmental responses that may require sequential, state-dependent intervention. BioEdge-RGC was developed as a transcriptomics-informed computational benchmark for transferring a globally planned model-predictive-control policy to compact regional neural models operating with incomplete observations and reduced communication.
methodsPublic mouse optic-nerve-crush transcriptomic datasets were summarized into seven retinal ganglion cell modules and eight retinal environment modules and fused into a 15-dimensional temporal reference state for a 16-region, five-step simulator. A candidate-constrained MPC expert was approximated by a central neural teacher and local, neighbour-aware, and coordinated regional students trained using hybrid knowledge distillation or direct MPC supervision. Missing observations, severe simulated injury, INT8 quantization, local parameter perturbations, and an independent GSE229033 transcriptomic plausibility assessment were evaluated.
resultsThe central teacher retained 99.90% of the MPC objective, and the coordinated distilled student retained 99.69% of teacher performance while reducing modeled communication from 5520 to 1080 bytes per episode. The coordinated-versus-local mean-objective difference was +0.000053 and did not meet the predefined +0.008 threshold; direct MPC supervision performed at least as well as hybrid distillation. The principal objective-based conclusions were preserved across all nine local parameter conditions, whereas the coordinated failure-rate advantage was not parameter-robust. In GSE229033, six of seven modules changed in the predefined favorable direction, but the oriented composite bootstrap interval included zero.
conclusionsCompact regional neural policies reproduced MPC performance with minimal objective loss and substantially lower modeled communication. The external transcriptomic analysis provided limited plausibility support for the RGC state orientation, while neither analysis validated simulator dynamics, controller efficacy, biological treatment effects, or clinical applicability.
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.