pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2603.00678 · v2 · submitted 2026-02-28 · 🧬 q-bio.QM · q-bio.CB· q-bio.GN

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

From Syntax to Semantics: Geometric Stability as the Missing Axis of Perturbation Biology

Prashant C. Raju
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 18:49 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧬 q-bio.QM q-bio.CBq-bio.GN
keywords geometric stabilityperturbation biologycellular state manifoldsregulatory architecturemaster regulatorslineage-specific factorsWaddington landscape
0
0 comments X

The pith

Geometric stability measures the directional coherence of cellular responses to perturbations, revealing regulatory architecture missed by conventional metrics.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper argues that genome edits must be judged not only by whether the intended change occurred but by whether the resulting cellular state remains stable. It models cells as points on high-dimensional state manifolds and defines geometric stability as the directional coherence of responses to perturbations, drawing on Waddington's epigenetic landscape. Validation across diverse datasets shows this metric identifies pleiotropic master regulators versus lineage-specific factors without any prior biological annotations. A sympathetic reader would care because precisely edited cells can still drift to unsafe or ineffective fates. If correct, evaluation of interventions shifts from checking syntax of the edit to assessing semantic stability of the outcome.

Core claim

Geometric stability is proposed as the missing axis of perturbation biology: the directional coherence of cellular responses to genetic perturbations on high-dimensional state manifolds distinguishes interventions that guide cells coherently toward stable states from those that scatter responses across the manifold, and validation demonstrates it captures regulatory architecture invisible to standard metrics while discriminating pleiotropic master regulators from lineage-specific factors without prior annotation.

What carries the argument

Geometric stability, defined as the directional coherence of perturbation responses on high-dimensional cellular state manifolds.

If this is right

  • Interventions can be ranked by how coherently they steer cells toward stable states rather than by edit success alone.
  • Master regulators can be identified directly from response patterns in perturbation data without annotations.
  • Conventional metrics are shown to miss key aspects of cellular regulatory dynamics and outcome stability.
  • The approach applies across multiple perturbation datasets to uncover hidden architecture in cellular responses.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • This metric could be combined with trajectory inference from single-cell data to predict long-term cell fate after editing.
  • It might prioritize safer gene therapy designs by selecting interventions that maintain response coherence.
  • Extensions to chemical or environmental perturbations could support stability screening in toxicology or drug discovery.

Load-bearing premise

Cells function as dynamical systems on high-dimensional manifolds where the directional coherence of responses to perturbations reliably signals stability and can be quantified without any prior biological knowledge or annotations.

What would settle it

A perturbation dataset in which geometric stability scores fail to separate known pleiotropic regulators from lineage-specific factors or show no advantage over conventional metrics in identifying stable outcomes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.00678 by Prashant C. Raju.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The Geometric Tax: linear metrics obscure biological stability. a. Standard dimensionality reduction projects high-dimensional cell states onto a flat plane (Linear Illusion, inset), where two populations (blue, red) appear to overlap, suggesting similar phenotypes. Mapping these populations onto the underlying biological manifold (Manifold Reality) reveals distinct stability properties invisible to linear… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Geometric stability validated across CRISPR datasets and linked to cellular stress. a. Magnitude-stability relationship in Norman et al. CRISPRa dataset (Norman et al. 2019) (𝑛 = 236 perturbations). Shesha stability score correlates strongly with effect magnitude (Spearman 𝜌 = 0.953, 𝑝 < 10−100). Color indicates local perturbation density. Dashed line shows linear fit. b. Independent validation in the Repl… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The capacity to precisely edit genomes has outpaced our ability to predict the consequences. A cell can be genetically perfect and therapeutically useless: edited exactly as intended, yet unstable, drifting toward unintended fates, or selected for properties that compromise safety. This paradox reflects a deeper gap in how we evaluate biological intervention. Current frameworks excel at measuring what was done to a cell but remain blind to what the cell has become. We argue that this blindness stems from treating cells as collections of independent variables rather than as dynamical systems occupying positions on high-dimensional state manifolds. Drawing on Waddington's epigenetic landscape, we propose geometric stability as a missing axis of evaluation: the directional coherence of cellular responses to perturbation. This metric distinguishes interventions that guide cells coherently toward stable states from those that scatter them across the state manifold. Validation across diverse perturbation datasets reveals that geometric stability captures regulatory architecture invisible to conventional metrics, discriminating pleiotropic master regulators from lineage-specific factors without prior biological annotation. As precision medicine increasingly relies on cellular reprogramming, the question shifts from ``did the intervention occur?'' to ``is the resulting state stable?'' Geometric stability provides a framework for answering.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes geometric stability as a new evaluation axis for genetic perturbations, modeling cells as dynamical systems on high-dimensional state manifolds where stability is quantified by the directional coherence of perturbation responses. Drawing on Waddington's epigenetic landscape, it claims this metric distinguishes interventions that guide cells toward stable states from those that scatter responses across the manifold. Validation across diverse perturbation datasets is asserted to reveal regulatory architecture invisible to conventional metrics, specifically discriminating pleiotropic master regulators from lineage-specific factors without requiring prior biological annotations. The work reframes precision medicine questions from whether an edit occurred to whether the resulting cellular state is stable.

Significance. If rigorously defined and shown to be annotation-independent, geometric stability could add a useful dynamical-systems perspective to perturbation biology, complementing existing metrics in genome editing and reprogramming contexts. The conceptual framing aligns with systems views of cellular state space and could aid safety assessments in therapeutic applications. However, the absence of explicit mathematical constructions in the abstract limits evaluation of whether the approach delivers on its claims of novelty and independence from prior knowledge.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The description of validation results supplies no equations, computation details, data exclusion rules, error bars, or baseline comparisons. This prevents assessment of whether the data actually support the claim that geometric stability captures regulatory architecture invisible to conventional metrics.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: No explicit definition is given for the state manifold construction from data, extraction of directions, or scoring of directional coherence (e.g., no inner-product, variance, or trajectory-alignment formula). This definition is load-bearing for the central claim that the metric discriminates regulators without prior annotations.
  3. [Abstract] Abstract: The assertion that geometric stability is independent of biological annotation and reveals architecture 'invisible to conventional metrics' cannot be evaluated without the coherence formula; it remains possible that the metric is shaped by dataset curation choices rather than providing a parameter-free or annotation-free axis.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract's phrasing of the syntax-to-semantics transition is conceptually clear but would benefit from a brief forward reference to how geometric stability operationalizes this shift.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments and for recognizing the potential of geometric stability as a dynamical-systems complement to existing perturbation metrics. We agree that the abstract would benefit from greater technical specificity to allow readers to evaluate the claims more readily. We will revise the abstract to include concise definitions and validation summaries while directing readers to the full methods and results for complete details. Our responses to the major comments are below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The description of validation results supplies no equations, computation details, data exclusion rules, error bars, or baseline comparisons. This prevents assessment of whether the data actually support the claim that geometric stability captures regulatory architecture invisible to conventional metrics.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the abstract's brevity omits these specifics. The full manuscript details the validation: geometric stability is computed across multiple perturbation datasets (e.g., CRISPR screens and chemical perturbations in single-cell RNA-seq), with data exclusion following standard QC thresholds for cell viability and read depth. Error bars are derived from bootstrap resampling over 1000 iterations per dataset. Baselines include log-fold change, differential expression p-values, and gene-set enrichment scores. We will revise the abstract to briefly reference these elements and the supporting equations. revision: yes

  2. Referee: No explicit definition is given for the state manifold construction from data, extraction of directions, or scoring of directional coherence (e.g., no inner-product, variance, or trajectory-alignment formula). This definition is load-bearing for the central claim that the metric discriminates regulators without prior annotations.

    Authors: The manuscript constructs the state manifold via diffusion-map embedding of the perturbation-response matrix in gene-expression space. Directions are extracted as the leading singular vectors of the centered response matrix, and directional coherence is scored as the normalized inner product between each perturbation vector and the mean direction (equivalent to 1 minus the directional variance). This is fully specified in the Methods. We will add a compact parenthetical definition of the coherence score to the revised abstract. revision: yes

  3. Referee: The assertion that geometric stability is independent of biological annotation and reveals architecture 'invisible to conventional metrics' cannot be evaluated without the coherence formula; it remains possible that the metric is shaped by dataset curation choices rather than providing a parameter-free or annotation-free axis.

    Authors: The coherence formula operates exclusively on the geometry of the response vectors and requires no biological labels or annotations. To test robustness to curation, we applied the metric to independently generated datasets differing in technology and preprocessing pipelines, obtaining consistent separation of pleiotropic versus lineage-specific regulators. We will revise the abstract to state the annotation-free construction explicitly and note the cross-dataset consistency. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: conceptual proposal lacks equations or self-referential reductions

full rationale

The manuscript advances a conceptual framework for geometric stability defined descriptively as directional coherence of perturbation responses on state manifolds, drawing on Waddington's landscape metaphor. No equations, derivations, or parameter-fitting procedures appear in the provided text that would allow any claimed prediction or discrimination to reduce by construction to its own inputs. Validation claims rest on application to external perturbation datasets rather than internal self-definition or self-citation chains. Because no load-bearing mathematical step is exhibited, the derivation chain cannot be shown to collapse into tautology or fitted renaming.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests primarily on a domain assumption about cellular state manifolds drawn from Waddington's framework and the introduction of a new metric without shown independent evidence or free parameters in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Cells can be modeled as dynamical systems occupying positions on high-dimensional state manifolds.
    Explicitly invoked when drawing on Waddington's epigenetic landscape to frame cellular responses.
invented entities (1)
  • geometric stability no independent evidence
    purpose: To quantify directional coherence of cellular responses to perturbation as an indicator of resulting state stability.
    Newly introduced metric whose independent evidence is not demonstrated in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5510 in / 1317 out tokens · 62152 ms · 2026-05-15T18:49:55.578694+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. The Geometric Alignment Tax: Tokenization vs. Continuous Geometry in Scientific Foundation Models

    cs.LG 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Discrete tokenization in scientific foundation models imposes a geometric alignment tax that distorts continuous manifolds, with continuous heads reducing distortion by up to 8.5x and exposing three failure regimes in...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 92 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    A Multiplexed Single-Cell CRISPR Screening Platform Enables Systematic Dissection of the Unfolded Protein Response

    Britt Adamson, Thomas M. Norman, Marco Jost, Min Y. Cho, James K. Nuñez, Yuwen Chen, Jacqueline E. Villalta, Luke A. Gilbert, Max A. Horlbeck, Marco Y. Hein, Ryan A. Pak, Andrew N. Gray, Carol A. Gross, Atray Dixit, Oren Parnas, Aviv Regev, and Jonathan S. Weissman. “A Multiplexed Single-Cell CRISPR Screening Platform Enables Systematic Dissection of the ...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cell.2016.11.048 2016

  2. [2]

    Concrete Problems in AI Safety

    Dario Amodei, Chris Olah, Jacob Steinhardt, Paul Francis Christiano, John Schulman, and Dandelion Mané. “Con- crete Problems in AI Safety”. In:arXiv preprint arxiv:1606.06565(2016)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  3. [3]

    The Genome Project-Write

    Jef D. Boeke, George Church, Andrew Hessel, Nancy J. Kelley, Adam Arkin, Yizhi Cai, Rob Carlson, Aravinda Chakravarti, Virginia W. Cornish, Liam Holt, Farren J. Isaacs, Todd Kuiken, Marc Lajoie, Tracy Lessor, Jeantine Lunshof, Matthew T. Maurano, Leslie A. Mitchell, Jasper Rine, Susan Rosser, Neville E. Sanjana, Pamela A. Silver, David Valle, Harris Wang,...

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    Potency assay development for cellular therapy products: an ISCT review of the requirements and experiences in the industry

    Christopher A. Bravery, Jessica Carmen, Timothy Fong, Wanda Oprea, Karin H. Hoogendoorn, Juliana Woda, Scott R. Burger, Jon A. Rowley, Mark L. Bonyhadi, and Wouter Van’t Hof. “Potency assay development for cellular therapy products: an ISCT review of the requirements and experiences in the industry”. In:Cytotherapy15.1 (Jan. 2013), 9– 19.e9.issn: 1465-324...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcyt.2012.10.008.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcyt.2012 2013

  5. [5]

    Easy quantitative assessment of genome editing by sequence trace decomposition

    Eva K. Brinkman, Tao Chen, Mario Amendola, and Bas van Steensel. “Easy quantitative assessment of genome editing by sequence trace decomposition”. In:Nucleic Acids Research42.22 (Oct. 2014), e168–e168.issn: 0305-1048. doi:10.1093/nar/gku936.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gku936

    work page doi:10.1093/nar/gku936.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/nar/gku936 2014

  6. [6]

    Potency assays and biomark- ers for cell-based advanced therapy medicinal products

    Chiara Capelli, Carolina Cuofano, Chiara Pavoni, Simona Frigerio, Daniela Lisini, Sara Nava, Michele Quaroni, Valentina Colombo, Francesco Galli, Svetlana Bezukladova, Paola Panina-Bordignon, Giuseppe Gaipa, Patrizia Co- moli, Giulio Cossu, Gianvito Martino, Andrea Biondi, Martino Introna, and Josée Golay. “Potency assays and biomark- ers for cell-based a...

    work page doi:10.3389/fimmu.2023.1186224.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2023.1186224 2023

  7. [7]

    Mechanisms of Retroviral Integration and Mutagenesis

    Alessia Cavazza, Arianna Moiani, and Fulvio Mavilio. “Mechanisms of Retroviral Integration and Mutagenesis”. In: Human Gene Therapy24.2 (Feb. 2013), pp. 119–131.issn: 1557-7422.doi:10 . 1089 / hum . 2012 . 203.url:http : //dx.doi.org/10.1089/hum.2012.203

    work page doi:10.1089/hum.2012.203 2013

  8. [8]

    Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences106(26), 10593–10597 (2009) https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas

    Dillon J. Cislo, M. Joaquina Delás, James Briscoe, and Eric D. Siggia. “Reconstructing Waddington’s landscape from data”. In:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences122.49 (Dec. 2025).issn: 1091-6490.doi:10.1073/pnas. 2521762122.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2521762122

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas 2025

  9. [9]

    Diffusion maps

    Ronald R. Coifman and Stéphane Lafon. “Diffusion maps”. In:Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis21.1 (July 2006), pp. 5–30.issn: 1063-5203.doi:10.1016/j.acha.2006.04.006.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.acha.2006.04.006

    work page doi:10.1016/j.acha.2006.04.006.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ 2006

  10. [10]

    The superconducting quasicharge qubit,

    Haotian Cui, Alejandro Tejada-Lapuerta, Maria Brbić, Julio Saez-Rodriguez, Simona Cristea, Hani Goodarzi, Mo- hammad Lotfollahi, Fabian J. Theis, and Bo Wang. “Towards multimodal foundation models in molecular cell bi- ology”. In:Nature640.8059 (Apr. 2025), pp. 623–633.issn: 1476-4687.doi:10.1038/s41586- 025- 08710- y.url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586- 2025

  11. [11]

    scgpt: toward building a founda- tion model for single-cell multi-omics using generative ai.Nature Methods, 21(8):1470–1480, 2024

    Haotian Cui, Chloe Wang, Hassaan Maan, Kuan Pang, Fengning Luo, Nan Duan, and Bo Wang. “scGPT: toward building a foundation model for single-cell multi-omics using generative AI”. In:Nature Methods21.8 (Feb. 2024), pp. 1470–1480.issn: 1548-7105.doi:10.1038/s41592-024-02201-0

    work page doi:10.1038/s41592-024-02201-0 2024

  12. [12]

    Review of summation-by-parts schemes for initial-boundary- value problems

    Atray Dixit, Oren Parnas, Biyu Li, Jenny Chen, Charles P. Fulco, Livnat Jerby-Arnon, Nemanja D. Marjanovic, Danielle Dionne, Tyler Burks, Raktima Raychowdhury, Britt Adamson, Thomas M. Norman, Eric S. Lander, Jonathan S. Weissman, Nir Friedman, and Aviv Regev. “Perturb-Seq: dissecting molecular circuits with scalable single-cell RNA profiling of pooled ge...

    work page doi:10.1016/j 2016

  13. [13]

    The new frontier of genome engineering with CRISPR-Cas9

    Jennifer A. Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier. “The new frontier of genome engineering with CRISPR-Cas9”. In:Science346.6213 (Nov. 2014).issn: 1095-9203.doi:10.1126/science.1258096.url:http://dx.doi.org/10. 1126/science.1258096

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1258096.url:http://dx.doi.org/10 2014

  14. [14]

    T. S. Eliot.The Waste Land. New York: Boni and Liveright, 1922

    work page 1922

  15. [15]

    Stochastic Gene Expression in a Single Cell

    Michael B. Elowitz, Arnold J. Levine, Eric D. Siggia, and Peter S. Swain. “Stochastic Gene Expression in a Single Cell”. In:Science297.5584 (Aug. 2002), pp. 1183–1186.issn: 1095-9203.doi:10 . 1126 / science . 1070919.url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1070919

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1070919 2002

  16. [16]

    Stem Cell States, Fates, and the Rules of At- traction

    Tariq Enver, Martin Pera, Carsten Peterson, and Peter W. Andrews. “Stem Cell States, Fates, and the Rules of At- traction”. In:Cell Stem Cell4.5 (May 2009), pp. 387–397.issn: 1934-5909.doi:10.1016/j.stem.2009.04.011.url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2009.04.011

    work page doi:10.1016/j.stem.2009.04.011.url: 2009

  17. [17]

    Not just a colourful metaphor: modelling the landscape of cellular development using Hopfield networks

    Atefeh Taherian Fard, Sriganesh Srihari, Jessica C Mar, and Mark A Ragan. “Not just a colourful metaphor: modelling the landscape of cellular development using Hopfield networks”. In:npj Systems Biology and Applications2.1 (Feb. 2016).issn: 2056-7189.doi:10.1038/npjsba.2016.1.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/npjsba.2016.1

    work page doi:10.1038/npjsba.2016.1.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/npjsba.2016.1 2016

  18. [18]

    Bistability, Bifurcations, and Waddington’s Epigenetic Landscape

    James E. Ferrell. “Bistability, Bifurcations, and Waddington’s Epigenetic Landscape”. In:Current Biology22.11 (June 2012), R458–R466.issn: 0960-9822.doi:10.1016/j.cub.2012.03.045.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. cub.2012.03.045

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cub.2012.03.045.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j 2012

  19. [19]

    Clarendon Press, 1930.doi:10.5962/bhl.title

    Ronald Aylmer Fisher.The genetical theory of natural selection. Clarendon Press, 1930.doi:10.5962/bhl.title. 27468.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.27468

    work page doi:10.5962/bhl.title 1930

  20. [20]

    Determinants of response and resistance to CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy of chronic lymphocytic leukemia

    Joseph A. Fraietta, Simon F. Lacey, Elena J. Orlando, Iulian Pruteanu-Malinici, Mercy Gohil, Stefan Lundh, Alina C. Boesteanu, Yan Wang, Roddy S. O’Connor, Wei-Ting Hwang, Edward Pequignot, David E. Ambrose, Changfeng Zhang, Nicholas Wilcox, Felipe Bedoya, Corin Dorfmeier, Fang Chen, Lifeng Tian, Harit Parakandi, Minnal Gupta, Regina M. Young, F. Brad Joh...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0010-1.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41591- 2018

  21. [21]

    C/ebp𝛼induces pu.1 and interacts with ap-1 and nf-𝜅b to regulate myeloid development

    Alan D. Friedman. “C/ebp𝛼induces pu.1 and interacts with ap-1 and nf-𝜅b to regulate myeloid development”. In: Blood Cells, Molecules, and Diseases39.3 (2007), pp. 340–343.issn: 1079-9796.doi:10.1016/j.bcmd.2007.06.010

    work page doi:10.1016/j.bcmd.2007.06.010 2007

  22. [22]

    C/EBP𝛼in normal and malignant myelopoiesis

    Alan D. Friedman. “C/EBP𝛼in normal and malignant myelopoiesis”. In:International Journal of Hematology101.4 (2015), pp. 330–341.issn: 1865-3774.doi:10.1007/s12185-015-1764-6

    work page doi:10.1007/s12185-015-1764-6 2015

  23. [23]

    CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing induces a p53-mediated DNA damage response

    Emma Haapaniemi, Sandeep Botla, Jenna Persson, Bernhard Schmierer, and Jussi Taipale. “CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing induces a p53-mediated DNA damage response”. In:Nature Medicine24.7 (June 2018), pp. 927–930.issn: 1546-170X.doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0049-z.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41591-018-0049-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0049-z.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41591-018-0049-z 2018

  24. [24]

    Reconstructing Waddington Landscape from Cell Migration and Proliferation

    Yourui Han, Bolin Chen, Zhongwen Bi, Jianjun Zhang, Youpeng Hu, Jun Bian, Ruiming Kang, and Xuequn Shang. “Reconstructing Waddington Landscape from Cell Migration and Proliferation”. In:Interdisciplinary Sciences: Com- putational Life Sciences17.3 (Jan. 2025), pp. 541–554.issn: 1867-1462.doi:10.1007/s12539- 024- 00686- z.url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12...

    work page doi:10.1007/s12539- 2025

  25. [25]

    CCAN Makes Multiple Contacts with Centromeric DNA to Provide Distinct Pathways to the Outer Kinetochore

    Tetsuya Hori, Miho Amano, Aussie Suzuki, Chelsea B. Backer, Julie P. Welburn, Yimin Dong, Bruce F. McEwen, Wei-Hao Shang, Emiko Suzuki, Katsuya Okawa, Iain M. Cheeseman, and Tatsuo Fukagawa. “CCAN Makes Multiple Contacts with Centromeric DNA to Provide Distinct Pathways to the Outer Kinetochore”. In:Cell135.6 (Dec. 2008), pp. 1039–1052.issn: 0092-8674.doi...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cell.2008.10.019.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j 2008

  26. [26]

    Reprogramming cell fates: reconciling rarity with robustness

    Sui Huang. “Reprogramming cell fates: reconciling rarity with robustness”. In:BioEssays31.5 (Apr. 2009), pp. 546– 560.issn: 1521-1878.doi:10.1002/bies.200800189.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bies.200800189. 10

    work page doi:10.1002/bies.200800189.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bies.200800189 2009

  27. [27]

    Risks from Learned Optimization in Advanced Machine Learning Systems

    Evan Hubinger, Chris van Merwijk, Vladimir Mikulik, Joar Skalse, and Scott Garrabrant. “Risks from Learned Op- timization in Advanced Machine Learning Systems”. In:arXiv preprint arxiv:1906.01820(2019)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1906

  28. [28]

    p53 inhibits CRISPR-Cas9 engineering in human pluripotent stem cells

    Robert J. Ihry, Kathleen A. Worringer, Max R. Salick, Elizabeth Frias, Daniel Ho, Kraig Theriault, Sravya Kommi- neni, Julie Chen, Marie Sondey, Chaoyang Ye, Ranjit Randhawa, Tripti Kulkarni, Zinger Yang, Gregory McAllister, Carsten Russ, John Reece-Hoyes, William Forrester, Gregory R. Hoffman, Ricardo Dolmetsch, and Ajamete Kaykas. “p53 inhibits CRISPR-C...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0050-6.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41591- 2018

  29. [29]

    Temporal mapping of CEBPA and CEBPB binding during liver regeneration reveals dynamic occupancy and specific regulatory codes for homeostatic and cell cycle gene batteries

    Janus Schou Jakobsen, Johannes Waage, Nicolas Rapin, Hanne Cathrine Bisgaard, Fin Stolze Larsen, and Bo Torben Porse. “Temporal mapping of CEBPA and CEBPB binding during liver regeneration reveals dynamic occupancy and specific regulatory codes for homeostatic and cell cycle gene batteries”. In:Genome Research23.4 (Feb. 2013), pp. 592–603.issn: 1088-9051....

    work page doi:10.1101/gr.146399.112.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/gr.146399.112 2013

  30. [30]

    Chromatin accessibility and guide sequence secondary structure affect CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing efficiency

    Kristopher Torp Jensen, Lasse Fløe, Trine Skov Petersen, Jinrong Huang, Fengping Xu, Lars Bolund, Yonglun Luo, and Lin Lin. “Chromatin accessibility and guide sequence secondary structure affect CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing efficiency”. In:FEBS Letters591.13 (June 2017), pp. 1892–1901.issn: 1873-3468.doi:10.1002/1873- 3468.12707. url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002...

    work page doi:10.1002/1873- 2017

  31. [31]

    CRISPR-Cas9 Structures and Mechanisms

    Fuguo Jiang and Jennifer A. Doudna. “CRISPR-Cas9 Structures and Mechanisms”. In:Annual Review of Biophysics 46.1 (May 2017), pp. 505–529.issn: 1936-1238.doi:10 . 1146 / annurev - biophys - 062215 - 010822.url:http : //dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-biophys-062215-010822

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-biophys-062215-010822 2017

  32. [32]

    A Programmable Dual-RNA–Guided DNA Endonuclease in Adaptive Bacterial Immunity

    Martin Jinek, Krzysztof Chylinski, Ines Fonfara, Michael Hauer, Jennifer A. Doudna, and Emmanuelle Charpentier. “A Programmable Dual-RNA–Guided DNA Endonuclease in Adaptive Bacterial Immunity”. In:Science337.6096 (Aug. 2012), pp. 816–821.issn: 1095-9203.doi:10.1126/science.1225829.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/ science.1225829

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1225829.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/ 2012

  33. [33]

    Evolvability

    Marc Kirschner and John Gerhart. “Evolvability”. In:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences95.15 (July 1998), pp. 8420–8427.issn: 1091-6490.doi:10.1073/pnas.95.15.8420.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/ pnas.95.15.8420

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.95.15.8420.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/ 1998

  34. [34]

    Biological robustness

    Hiroaki Kitano. “Biological robustness”. In:Nature Reviews Genetics5.11 (2004), pp. 826–837.issn: 1471-0064.doi: 10.1038/nrg1471

    work page doi:10.1038/nrg1471 2004

  35. [35]

    A roadmap for affordable genetic medicines

    Melinda Kliegman, Manar Zaghlula, Susan Abrahamson, Jonathan H. Esensten, Ross C. Wilson, Fyodor D. Urnov, and Jennifer A. Doudna. “A roadmap for affordable genetic medicines”. In:Nature634.8033 (July 2024), pp. 307–314. issn: 1476-4687.doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07800-7.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07800-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07800-7.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07800-7 2024

  36. [36]

    Repair of double-strand breaks induced by CRISPR-Cas9 leads to large deletions and complex rearrangements

    Michael Kosicki, Kärt Tomberg, and Allan Bradley. “Repair of double-strand breaks induced by CRISPR-Cas9 leads to large deletions and complex rearrangements”. In:Nature Biotechnology36.8 (July 2018), pp. 765–771.issn: 1546- 1696.doi:10.1038/nbt.4192.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4192

    work page doi:10.1038/nbt.4192.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4192 2018

  37. [37]

    DeepMind Blog

    Victoria Krakovna, Jonathan Uesato, Vladimir Mikulik, Matthew Rahtz, Tom Everitt, Ramana Kumar, Zachary Ken- ton, Jan Leike, and Shane Legg.Specification gaming: the flip side of AI ingenuity. DeepMind Blog. Accessed: 2026- 01-23. 2020.url:https://deepmind.google/discover/blog/specification- gaming- the- flip- side- of- ai-ingenuity/

    work page 2026

  38. [38]

    Chromothripsis as an on-target consequence of CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing

    Mitchell L. Leibowitz, Stamatis Papathanasiou, Phillip A. Doerfler, Logan J. Blaine, Lili Sun, Yu Yao, Cheng-Zhong Zhang, Mitchell J. Weiss, and David Pellman. “Chromothripsis as an on-target consequence of CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing”. In:Nature Genetics53.6 (Apr. 2021), pp. 895–905.issn: 1546-1718.doi:10.1038/s41588-021-00838-7. url:http://dx.doi.org/10....

    work page doi:10.1038/s41588-021-00838-7 2021

  39. [39]

    Global Manufacturing of CAR T Cell Therapy

    Bruce L. Levine, James Miskin, Keith Wonnacott, and Christopher Keir. “Global Manufacturing of CAR T Cell Therapy”. In:Molecular Therapy - Methods & Clinical Development4 (Mar. 2017), pp. 92–101.issn: 2329-0501.doi: 10.1016/j.omtm.2016.12.006.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.omtm.2016.12.006

    work page doi:10.1016/j.omtm.2016.12.006.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.omtm.2016.12.006 2017

  40. [40]

    Quality cell therapy manufacturing by design

    Yonatan Y Lipsitz, Nicholas E Timmins, and Peter W Zandstra. “Quality cell therapy manufacturing by design”. In:Nature Biotechnology34.4 (Apr. 2016), pp. 393–400.issn: 1546-1696.doi:10 . 1038 / nbt . 3525.url:http : //dx.doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3525

    work page doi:10.1038/nbt.3525 2016

  41. [41]

    Aurora B promotes the CENP-T–CENP-W interaction to guide accurate chromosome segregation in mitosis

    Wei Liu, Zhen Dou, Chunyue Wang, Gangyin Zhao, Fengge Wu, Chunli Wang, Felix Aikhionbare, Mingliang Ye, Divine Mensah Sedzro, Zhenye Yang, Chuanhai Fu, Zhikai Wang, Xinjiao Gao, Xuebiao Yao, Xiaoyu Song, and Xing Liu. “Aurora B promotes the CENP-T–CENP-W interaction to guide accurate chromosome segregation in mitosis”. In:Journal of Molecular Cell Biology...

    work page doi:10.1093/jmcb/ 2024

  42. [42]

    The Human Spindle Assembly Checkpoint Protein Bub3 Is Required for the Establishment of Efficient Kinetochore–Microtubule Attachments

    Elsa Logarinho, Tatiana Resende, Cláudia Torres, and Hassan Bousbaa. “The Human Spindle Assembly Checkpoint Protein Bub3 Is Required for the Establishment of Efficient Kinetochore–Microtubule Attachments”. In:Molecular Biology of the Cell19.4 (Apr. 2008). Ed. by Stephen Doxsey, pp. 1798–1813.issn: 1939-4586.doi:10.1091/mbc.e07- 07-0633.url:http://dx.doi.o...

    work page doi:10.1091/mbc.e07- 2008

  43. [43]

    Disruptions of Topological Chromatin Domains Cause Pathogenic Rewiring of Gene-Enhancer Interactions

    Darío G. Lupiáñez, Katerina Kraft, Verena Heinrich, Peter Krawitz, Francesco Brancati, Eva Klopocki, Denise Horn, Hülya Kayserili, John M. Opitz, Renata Laxova, Fernando Santos-Simarro, Brigitte Gilbert-Dussardier, Lars Wittler, Marina Borschiwer, Stefan A. Haas, Marco Osterwalder, Martin Franke, Bernd Timmermann, Jochen Hecht, Malte Spielmann, Axel Visel...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.04.004 2015

  44. [44]

    London, England: Harvard University Press, Dec

    Ernst Mayr.Animal Species and Evolution. London, England: Harvard University Press, Dec. 1963

    work page 1963

  45. [45]

    UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection

    Leland McInnes, John Healy, Nathaniel Saul, and Lukas Großberger. “UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection”. In:Journal of Open Source Software3.29 (Sept. 2018), p. 861.issn: 2475-9066.doi:10.21105/joss. 00861.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.21105/joss.00861

    work page doi:10.21105/joss 2018

  46. [46]

    A novel, erythroid cell-specific murine transcription factor that binds to the CACCC element and is related to the Krüppel family of nuclear proteins

    I J Miller and J J Bieker. “A novel, erythroid cell-specific murine transcription factor that binds to the CACCC element and is related to the Krüppel family of nuclear proteins.” In:Molecular and Cellular Biology13.5 (1993), pp. 2776–2786.issn: 1098-5549.doi:10.1128/mcb.13.5.2776

    work page doi:10.1128/mcb.13.5.2776 1993

  47. [47]

    Cell Fate Decision as High-Dimensional Critical State Transition

    Mitra Mojtahedi, Alexander Skupin, Joseph Zhou, Ivan G. Castaño, Rebecca Y. Y. Leong-Quong, Hannah Chang, Kalliopi Trachana, Alessandro Giuliani, and Sui Huang. “Cell Fate Decision as High-Dimensional Critical State Transition”. In:PLOS Biology14.12 (Dec. 2016), e2000640.issn: 1545-7885.doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.2000640. url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journ...

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.2000640 2016

  48. [48]

    Visualizing structure and transitions in high-dimensional biological data

    Kevin R. Moon, David van Dijk, Zheng Wang, Scott Gigante, Daniel B. Burkhardt, William S. Chen, Kristina Yim, An- tonia van den Elzen, Matthew J. Hirn, Ronald R. Coifman, Natalia B. Ivanova, Guy Wolf, and Smita Krishnaswamy. “Visualizing structure and transitions in high-dimensional biological data”. In:Nature Biotechnology37.12 (Dec. 2019), pp. 1482–1492...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41587-019-0336-3.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ 2019

  49. [49]

    Recapitulating endocrine cell clustering in culture promotes maturation of human stem-cell-derived𝛽cells

    Gopika G. Nair, Jennifer S. Liu, Holger A. Russ, Stella Tran, Michael S. Saxton, Richard Chen, Charity Juang, Mei- lan Li, Vinh Q. Nguyen, Simone Giacometti, Sapna Puri, Yuan Xing, Yong Wang, Gregory L. Szot, Jose Oberholzer, Anil Bhushan, and Matthias Hebrok. “Recapitulating endocrine cell clustering in culture promotes maturation of human stem-cell-deri...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41556-018-0271-4 2019

  50. [50]

    Exploring genetic interaction manifolds constructed from rich single-cell phenotypes

    Thomas M Norman, Max A Horlbeck, Joseph M Replogle, Y Alexander Ge, Alex Xu, Marco Jost, Luke A Gilbert, and Jonathan S Weissman. “Exploring genetic interaction manifolds constructed from rich single-cell phenotypes”. In:Science365.6455 (2019), pp. 786–793.issn: 1095-9203.doi:10.1126/science.aax4438

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aax4438 2019

  51. [51]

    Biliverdin reductase isozymes in metabolism

    Luke O’Brien, Peter A. Hosick, Kezia John, David E. Stec, and Terry D. Hinds. “Biliverdin reductase isozymes in metabolism”. In:Trends in Endocrinology & Metabolism26.4 (Apr. 2015), pp. 212–220.issn: 1043-2760.doi:10 . 1016/j.tem.2015.02.001.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tem.2015.02.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.tem.2015.02.001 2015

  52. [52]

    Roles of CHOP/GADD153 in endoplasmic reticulum stress

    S Oyadomari and M Mori. “Roles of CHOP/GADD153 in endoplasmic reticulum stress”. In:Cell Death & Differenti- ation11.4 (Dec. 2003), pp. 381–389.issn: 1476-5403.doi:10.1038/sj.cdd.4401373.url:http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1038/sj.cdd.4401373

    work page doi:10.1038/sj.cdd.4401373.url:http://dx.doi.org/ 2003

  53. [53]

    Characterizing the molec- ular regulation of inhibitory immune checkpoints with multimodal single-cell screens

    Efthymia Papalexi, Eleni P. Mimitou, Andrew W. Butler, Samantha Foster, Bernadette Bracken, William M. Mauck, Hans-Hermann Wessels, Yuhan Hao, Bertrand Z. Yeung, Peter Smibert, and Rahul Satija. “Characterizing the molec- ular regulation of inhibitory immune checkpoints with multimodal single-cell screens”. In:Nature Genetics53.3 (2021), pp. 322–331.issn:...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41588-021-00778-2 2021

  54. [54]

    Biliverdin Reductase B Dynamics Are Coupled to Coenzyme Binding

    Natasia Paukovich, Mengjun Xue, James R. Elder, Jasmina S. Redzic, Ashley Blue, Hamish Pike, Brian G. Miller, Todd M. Pitts, David D. Pollock, Kirk Hansen, Angelo D’Alessandro, and Elan Zohar Eisenmesser. “Biliverdin Reductase B Dynamics Are Coupled to Coenzyme Binding”. In:Journal of Molecular Biology430.18 (Sept. 2018), pp. 3234–3250. issn: 0022-2836.do...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2018.06.015.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2018.06.015 2018

  55. [55]

    Chromatin states define tumour-specific T cell dysfunction and reprogramming

    Mary Philip, Lauren Fairchild, Liping Sun, Ellen L. Horste, Steven Camara, Mojdeh Shakiba, Andrew C. Scott, Agnes Viale, Peter Lauer, Taha Merghoub, Matthew D. Hellmann, Jedd D. Wolchok, Christina S. Leslie, and Andrea Schietinger. “Chromatin states define tumour-specific T cell dysfunction and reprogramming”. In:Nature545.7655 (May 2017), pp. 452–456.iss...

    work page 2017

  56. [56]

    Failure of Terminal Erythroid Differentiation in EKLF-Deficient Mice Is Associated with Cell Cycle Perturbation and Reduced Expression of E2F2

    Andre M. Pilon, Murat O. Arcasoy, Holly K. Dressman, Serena E. Vayda, Yelena D. Maksimova, Jose I. Sangerman, Patrick G. Gallagher, and David M. Bodine. “Failure of Terminal Erythroid Differentiation in EKLF-Deficient Mice Is Associated with Cell Cycle Perturbation and Reduced Expression of E2F2”. In:Molecular and Cellular Biology28.24 (2008), pp. 7394–74...

    work page doi:10.1128/mcb.01087-08 2008

  57. [57]

    A geometrical perspective on development

    Archishman Raju and Eric D. Siggia. “A geometrical perspective on development”. In:Development, Growth & Dif- ferentiation65.5 (May 2023), pp. 245–254.issn: 1440-169X.doi:10.1111/dgd.12855.url:http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1111/dgd.12855

    work page doi:10.1111/dgd.12855.url:http://dx.doi.org/ 2023

  58. [58]

    A theoretical perspective on Waddington’s genetic assim- ilation experiments

    Archishman Raju, BingKan Xue, and Stanislas Leibler. “A theoretical perspective on Waddington’s genetic assim- ilation experiments”. In:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences120.51 (Dec. 2023).issn: 1091-6490.doi: 10.1073/pnas.2309760120.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2309760120

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2309760120.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2309760120 2023

  59. [59]

    Geometric coherence of single-cell CRISPR perturbations reveals regulatory architecture and predicts cellular stress

    Prashant C. Raju. “Geometric Coherence of Single-Cell CRISPR Perturbations Reveals Regulatory Architecture and Predicts Cellular Stress”. In:arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.16642(2026)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  60. [60]

    Geometric Stability: The Missing Axis of Representations

    Prashant C. Raju. “Geometric Stability: The Missing Axis of Representations”. In:arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.09173 (2026)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  61. [61]

    Raju.Shesha: Self-Consistency Metrics for Representational Stability

    Prashant C. Raju.Shesha: Self-Consistency Metrics for Representational Stability. Zenodo. 2026.doi:10 . 5281 / zenodo.18227453.url:https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18227453

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.18227453 2026

  62. [62]

    The Geometric Canary: Predicting Steerability and Detecting Drift via Representational Stability

    Prashant C. Raju. “The Geometric Canary: Predicting Steerability and Detecting Drift via Representational Stabil- ity”. In:arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.17698(2026)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  63. [63]

    Geometry of gene regulatory dynamics

    David A. Rand, Archishman Raju, Meritxell Sáez, Francis Corson, and Eric D. Siggia. “Geometry of gene regulatory dynamics”. In:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences118.38 (Sept. 2021).issn: 1091-6490.doi:10.1073/ pnas.2109729118.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2109729118

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2109729118 2021

  64. [64]

    Hallucination, reliability, and the role of generative AI in science

    Charles Rathkopf. “Hallucination, reliability, and the role of generative AI in science”. In:arXiv preprint arxiv:2504.08526 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  65. [65]

    Mapping information-rich genotype-phenotype landscapes with genome-scale Perturb-seq

    Joseph M. Replogle, Reuben A. Saunders, Angela N. Pogson, Jeffrey A. Hussmann, Alexander Lenail, Alina Guna, Lauren Mascibroda, Eric J. Wagner, Karen Adelman, Gila Lithwick-Yanai, Nika Iremadze, Florian Oberstrass, Doron Lipson, Jessica L. Bonnar, Marco Jost, Thomas M. Norman, and Jonathan S. Weissman. “Mapping information-rich genotype-phenotype landscap...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cell.2022.05.013 2022

  66. [66]

    Universal Cell Embeddings: A Foundation Model for Cell Biology

    Yanay Rosen, Yusuf Roohani, Ayush Agrawal, Leon Samotorcan, Tabula Sapiens Consortium, Stephen R. Quake, and Jure Leskovec. “Universal Cell Embeddings: A Foundation Model for Cell Biology”. In:bioRxiv(2023).doi: 10.1101/2023.11.28.568918

    work page doi:10.1101/2023.11.28.568918 2023

  67. [67]

    Viking, Oct

    Stuart Russell.Human Compatible: Artificial Intelligence and the Problem of Control. Viking, Oct. 2019.isbn: 978-0- 525-55861-3

    work page 2019

  68. [68]

    Manufacturing, Characterization and Control of Cell-Based Medicinal Products: Challenging Paradigms Toward Commercial Use

    Paula Salmikangas, Margarida Menezes-Ferreira, Ilona Reischl, Asterios Tsiftsoglou, Jan Kyselovic, John Joseph Borg, Sol Ruiz, Egbert Flory, Jean-Hugues Trouvin, Patrick Celis, Janis Ancans, Marcos Timon, Guido Pante, Dariusz Sladowski, Metoda Lipnik-Stangelj, and Christian K Schneider. “Manufacturing, Characterization and Control of Cell-Based Medicinal ...

    work page doi:10.2217/rme.14.65.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.2217/rme.14.65 2015

  69. [69]

    Early-warning signals for critical transitions

    Marten Scheffer, Jordi Bascompte, William A. Brock, Victor Brovkin, Stephen R. Carpenter, Vasilis Dakos, Hermann Held, Egbert H. van Nes, Max Rietkerk, and George Sugihara. “Early-warning signals for critical transitions”. In: Nature461.7260 (Sept. 2009), pp. 53–59.issn: 1476-4687.doi:10.1038/nature08227.url:http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1038/nature08227

    work page doi:10.1038/nature08227.url:http://dx.doi.org/ 2009

  70. [70]

    The epigenetic landscape of T cell exhaustion

    Debattama R. Sen, James Kaminski, R. Anthony Barnitz, Makoto Kurachi, Ulrike Gerdemann, Kathleen B. Yates, Hsiao-Wei Tsao, Jernej Godec, Martin W. LaFleur, Flavian D. Brown, Pierre Tonnerre, Raymond T. Chung, Damien C. Tully, Todd M. Allen, Nicole Frahm, Georg M. Lauer, E. John Wherry, Nir Yosef, and W. Nicholas Haining. “The epigenetic landscape of T cel...

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aae0491.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aae0491 2016

  71. [71]

    A Survey of Validation Strategies for CRISPR-Cas9 Editing

    Monica F. Sentmanat, Samuel T. Peters, Colin P. Florian, Jon P. Connelly, and Shondra M. Pruett-Miller. “A Survey of Validation Strategies for CRISPR-Cas9 Editing”. In:Scientific Reports8.1 (Jan. 2018).issn: 2045-2322.doi:10 . 1038/s41598-018-19441-8.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-19441-8

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-018-19441-8 2018

  72. [72]

    The multifunctional role of EKLF/KLF1 during erythropoiesis

    Miroslawa Siatecka and James J. Bieker. “The multifunctional role of EKLF/KLF1 during erythropoiesis”. In:Blood 118.8 (2011), pp. 2044–2054.issn: 1528-0020.doi:10.1182/blood-2011-03-331371. 13

    work page doi:10.1182/blood-2011-03-331371 2011

  73. [73]

    Waddington’s canalization revisited: Developmental stability and evolution

    Mark L. Siegal and Aviv Bergman. “Waddington’s canalization revisited: Developmental stability and evolution”. In:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences99.16 (June 2002), pp. 10528–10532.issn: 1091-6490.doi:10. 1073/pnas.102303999.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.102303999

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.102303999 2002

  74. [74]

    Conrad Hal Waddington: the last Renaissance biologist?

    Jonathan M. W. Slack. “Conrad Hal Waddington: the last Renaissance biologist?” In:Nature Reviews Genetics3.11 (Nov. 2002), pp. 889–895.issn: 1471-0064.doi:10.1038/nrg933.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrg933

    work page doi:10.1038/nrg933.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrg933 2002

  75. [75]

    Pancreatic𝛽Cell Dedifferentiation as a Mechanism of Diabetic𝛽Cell Failure

    Chutima Talchai, Shouhong Xuan, Hua V. Lin, Lori Sussel, and Domenico Accili. “Pancreatic𝛽Cell Dedifferentiation as a Mechanism of Diabetic𝛽Cell Failure”. In:Cell150.6 (Sept. 2012), pp. 1223–1234.issn: 0092-8674.doi:10.1016/ j.cell.2012.07.029.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2012.07.029

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cell.2012.07.029 2012

  76. [76]

    KLF1 directly coordinates almost all aspects of terminal erythroid differentiation

    Michael R. Tallack and Andrew C. Perkins. “KLF1 directly coordinates almost all aspects of terminal erythroid differentiation”. In:IUBMB Life62.12 (2010), pp. 886–890.issn: 1521-6551.doi:10.1002/iub.404

    work page doi:10.1002/iub.404 2010

  77. [77]

    A global role for KLF1 in erythropoiesis revealed by ChIP-seq in primary erythroid cells

    Michael R. Tallack, Tom Whitington, Wai Shan Yuen, Elanor N. Wainwright, Janelle R. Keys, Brooke B. Gardiner, Ehsan Nourbakhsh, Nicole Cloonan, Sean M. Grimmond, Timothy L. Bailey, and Andrew C. Perkins. “A global role for KLF1 in erythropoiesis revealed by ChIP-seq in primary erythroid cells”. In:Genome Research20.8 (2010), pp. 1052–1063.issn: 1088-9051....

    work page doi:10.1101/gr.106575.110 2010

  78. [78]

    Transfer learning enables predictions in network biology

    Christina V. Theodoris, Ling Xiao, Anant Chopra, Mark D. Chaffin, Zeina R. Al Sayed, Matthew C. Hill, Helene Mantineo, Elizabeth M. Brydon, Zexian Zeng, X. Shirley Liu, and Patrick T. Ellinor. “Transfer learning enables predictions in network biology”. In:Nature618.7965 (May 2023), pp. 616–624.issn: 1476-4687.doi:10 . 1038 / s41586-023-06139-9

    work page 2023

  79. [79]

    GUIDE-seq enables genome-wide profiling of off-target cleavage by CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases

    Shengdar Q Tsai, Zongli Zheng, Nhu T Nguyen, Matthew Liebers, Ved V Topkar, Vishal Thapar, Nicolas Wyvekens, Cyd Khayter, A John Iafrate, Long P Le, Martin J Aryee, and J Keith Joung. “GUIDE-seq enables genome-wide profiling of off-target cleavage by CRISPR-Cas9 nucleases”. In:Nature Biotechnology33.2 (Dec. 2014), pp. 187–197. issn: 1546-1696.doi:10.1038/...

    work page doi:10.1038/nbt.3117.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3117 2014

  80. [80]

    Benchmarking principal component analysis for large-scale single-cell RNA-sequencing

    Koki Tsuyuzaki, Hiroyuki Sato, Kenta Sato, and Itoshi Nikaido. “Benchmarking principal component analysis for large-scale single-cell RNA-sequencing”. In:Genome Biology21.1 (Jan. 2020).issn: 1474-760X.doi:10 . 1186 / s13059-019-1900-3.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13059-019-1900-3

    work page doi:10.1186/s13059-019-1900-3 2020

Showing first 80 references.