What Topological and Geometric Structure Do Biological Foundation Models Learn? Evidence from 141 Hypotheses
Fuente:
arXiv
Salvato in:
| Autore principale: | |
|---|---|
| Natura: | Preprint |
| Pubblicazione: |
2026
|
| Soggetti: | |
| Accesso online: | |
| Tags: |
Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
|
| _version_ | 1866910042757791744 |
|---|---|
| author | Kendiukhov, Ihor |
| author_facet | Kendiukhov, Ihor |
| contents | When biological foundation models such as scGPT and Geneformer process single-cell gene expression, what geometric and topological structure forms in their internal representations? Is that structure biologically meaningful or a training artifact, and how confident should we be in such claims? We address these questions through autonomous large-scale hypothesis screening: an AI-driven executor-brainstormer loop that proposed, tested, and refined 141 geometric and topological hypotheses across 52 iterations, covering persistent homology, manifold distances, cross-model alignment, community structure, and directed topology, all with explicit null controls and disjoint gene-pool splits.
Three principal findings emerge. First, the models learn genuine geometric structure. Gene embedding neighborhoods exhibit non-trivial topology, with persistent homology significant in 11 of 12 transformer layers at p < 0.05 in the weakest domain and 12 of 12 in the other two. A multi-level distance hierarchy shows that manifold-aware metrics outperform Euclidean distance for identifying regulatory gene pairs, and graph community partitions track known transcription factor target relationships. Second, this structure is shared across independently trained models. CCA alignment between scGPT and Geneformer yields canonical correlation of 0.80 and gene retrieval accuracy of 72 percent, yet none of 19 tested methods reliably recover gene-level correspondences. The models agree on the global shape of gene space but not on precise gene placement. Third, the structure is more localized than it first appears. Under stringent null controls applied across all null families, robust signal concentrates in immune tissue, while lung and external lung signals weaken substantially. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2602_22289 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | What Topological and Geometric Structure Do Biological Foundation Models Learn? Evidence from 141 Hypotheses Kendiukhov, Ihor Quantitative Methods Machine Learning Genomics When biological foundation models such as scGPT and Geneformer process single-cell gene expression, what geometric and topological structure forms in their internal representations? Is that structure biologically meaningful or a training artifact, and how confident should we be in such claims? We address these questions through autonomous large-scale hypothesis screening: an AI-driven executor-brainstormer loop that proposed, tested, and refined 141 geometric and topological hypotheses across 52 iterations, covering persistent homology, manifold distances, cross-model alignment, community structure, and directed topology, all with explicit null controls and disjoint gene-pool splits. Three principal findings emerge. First, the models learn genuine geometric structure. Gene embedding neighborhoods exhibit non-trivial topology, with persistent homology significant in 11 of 12 transformer layers at p < 0.05 in the weakest domain and 12 of 12 in the other two. A multi-level distance hierarchy shows that manifold-aware metrics outperform Euclidean distance for identifying regulatory gene pairs, and graph community partitions track known transcription factor target relationships. Second, this structure is shared across independently trained models. CCA alignment between scGPT and Geneformer yields canonical correlation of 0.80 and gene retrieval accuracy of 72 percent, yet none of 19 tested methods reliably recover gene-level correspondences. The models agree on the global shape of gene space but not on precise gene placement. Third, the structure is more localized than it first appears. Under stringent null controls applied across all null families, robust signal concentrates in immune tissue, while lung and external lung signals weaken substantially. |
| title | What Topological and Geometric Structure Do Biological Foundation Models Learn? Evidence from 141 Hypotheses |
| topic | Quantitative Methods Machine Learning Genomics |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.22289 |