Upload results/t1_zs_oracle_comparison.md with huggingface_hub
Browse files
results/t1_zs_oracle_comparison.md
ADDED
|
@@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 1 |
+
# T1 zero-shot oracle metrics β raw vs tool-enriched (full 372k, 7-cell)
|
| 2 |
+
|
| 3 |
+
Both T1 zero-shot variants now have full per-cell oracle metrics from
|
| 4 |
+
the DeepSTARR-7cell scorer. This is the headline T1 paper-row data
|
| 5 |
+
for the "Zero-shot LLM" rows of Table 1.
|
| 6 |
+
|
| 7 |
+
## Aggregate
|
| 8 |
+
|
| 9 |
+
| Metric | zs_raw | zs_enriched | Ξ |
|
| 10 |
+
|---|---:|---:|---:|
|
| 11 |
+
| **FID β** | 15.46 | **14.80** | **β0.67** (better) |
|
| 12 |
+
| **Specificity** β | 1.87 | **1.94** | +0.07 |
|
| 13 |
+
| on_target_score | 3.00 | 3.09 | +0.09 |
|
| 14 |
+
| off_target_score | 1.13 | 1.15 | +0.02 |
|
| 15 |
+
| argmax_accuracy | 0.204 | 0.200 | β0.004 |
|
| 16 |
+
| diversity_edit | 0.580 | 0.574 | β0.007 |
|
| 17 |
+
| emb_cosine_similarity | 0.646 | 0.631 | β0.015 |
|
| 18 |
+
|
| 19 |
+
Tool-enrichment gives a **small net lift on FID + specificity** but
|
| 20 |
+
slightly hurts diversity and embedding similarity. The story is more
|
| 21 |
+
interesting per-cell.
|
| 22 |
+
|
| 23 |
+
## Per-cell argmax_accuracy (target-cell prediction success)
|
| 24 |
+
|
| 25 |
+
| Cell | n | zs_raw | zs_enriched | Ξ |
|
| 26 |
+
|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|
|
| 27 |
+
| **Ex** | 86,088 | 0.404 | **0.425** | **+0.020** β
|
|
| 28 |
+
| **Oli** | 63,278 | 0.333 | **0.344** | **+0.012** β
|
|
| 29 |
+
| Mic | 74,828 | 0.172 | 0.128 | **β0.044** β |
|
| 30 |
+
| Ast | 48,623 | 0.146 | 0.135 | β0.010 |
|
| 31 |
+
| In | 50,872 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0 |
|
| 32 |
+
| OPC | 40,162 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0 |
|
| 33 |
+
| End | 8,358 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0 |
|
| 34 |
+
|
| 35 |
+
## Per-cell FID (lower=better)
|
| 36 |
+
|
| 37 |
+
| Cell | n | zs_raw | zs_enriched | Ξ |
|
| 38 |
+
|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|
|
| 39 |
+
| **Ex** | 86,088 | 22.08 | **15.43** | **β6.65** (β30%) β
β
|
|
| 40 |
+
| In | 50,872 | 2.43 | **2.28** | β0.14 |
|
| 41 |
+
| Mic | 74,828 | **116.04** β | 115.74 | β0.30 (still degenerate) |
|
| 42 |
+
| Oli | 63,278 | 3.19 | 6.49 | +3.30 |
|
| 43 |
+
| Ast | 48,623 | 4.01 | 7.78 | +3.77 |
|
| 44 |
+
| OPC | 40,162 | **0.97** | 2.47 | +1.50 |
|
| 45 |
+
| End | 8,358 | 2.17 | 4.86 | +2.70 |
|
| 46 |
+
|
| 47 |
+
## Two paper-quality findings
|
| 48 |
+
|
| 49 |
+
### Finding 1 β Tool-enrichment helps Ex (the dominant class), not the rare ones
|
| 50 |
+
|
| 51 |
+
Zero-shot **Ex** generation improves substantially with tool-enriched
|
| 52 |
+
context: argmax_accuracy +0.020 (4.0% of all 86k Ex test rows now hit
|
| 53 |
+
the correct target cell), FID drops 30% (22β15). For Oli (the second-
|
| 54 |
+
most-represented class), enrichment also helps (+0.012 argmax).
|
| 55 |
+
|
| 56 |
+
For **End / OPC / In** (the rare classes, all 0.000 argmax in both
|
| 57 |
+
modes), enrichment does NOT help. The model can't generate cell-type-
|
| 58 |
+
specific enhancers for these cells from a prompt alone β they need
|
| 59 |
+
fine-tuning to surface the cell-type signal.
|
| 60 |
+
|
| 61 |
+
### Finding 2 β Mic is in a different failure regime
|
| 62 |
+
|
| 63 |
+
Mic has FID = 116 in both modes β the model's Mic outputs are
|
| 64 |
+
"collapsed" into a small set of templates (FID measures FrΓ©chet
|
| 65 |
+
distance from the gold-set distribution; 116 is huge). Tool-enrichment
|
| 66 |
+
doesn't fix this. Argmax is also only 0.13β0.17 for Mic. Likely
|
| 67 |
+
explanation: Mic enhancers in the gold set are systematically
|
| 68 |
+
distinct (microglia regulatory grammar is different) and the LLM's
|
| 69 |
+
prior doesn't cover that mode.
|
| 70 |
+
|
| 71 |
+
## Why this matters for the paper
|
| 72 |
+
|
| 73 |
+
The minimal Stage-1 fusion-SFT prediction (already wired in
|
| 74 |
+
post_bench_pipeline.sh):
|
| 75 |
+
|
| 76 |
+
* Ex / Oli: should improve modestly over zero-shot enriched.
|
| 77 |
+
* End / OPC / In / Mic / Ast: should improve **dramatically** (zero
|
| 78 |
+
β meaningful argmax_accuracy + FID dropping into the single digits).
|
| 79 |
+
|
| 80 |
+
The contrast with the zero-shot enriched row is exactly what makes
|
| 81 |
+
the paper claim "cell-context-conditioned fusion-SFT IS the value-add"
|
| 82 |
+
quantitatively defensible. We expect the gap-inversion: enrichment
|
| 83 |
+
helps dominant classes for zero-shot but rare classes for fusion-SFT.
|
| 84 |
+
|
| 85 |
+
## Output paths
|
| 86 |
+
|
| 87 |
+
```
|
| 88 |
+
/dev/shm/dnathinker/runs/exp_t1_grid_separatedQA_20260426_h100_vllm_full/
|
| 89 |
+
βββ zs_raw/
|
| 90 |
+
β βββ metrics.json (basic: parse, gc_err, len_ratio, per cell)
|
| 91 |
+
β βββ genqual/genqual.json (oracle: FID/spec/argmax/per cell)
|
| 92 |
+
βββ zs_enriched/
|
| 93 |
+
β βββ metrics.json (basic + per cell)
|
| 94 |
+
β βββ genqual/genqual.json (oracle + per cell) β landed @ ~11:00 UTC
|
| 95 |
+
```
|
| 96 |
+
|
| 97 |
+
HF: `explcre/dnathinker-checkpoints` mirror updated.
|