rewirebio.iobenchmarks
Evidence claim

genetic_interaction_finding: perturbation-ahlmann-20261011-protocol-norman-double

Genetic interaction finding of Norman double perturbations: expression prediction for held-out double perturbations (Ahlmann-Eltze et al. 2025 Fig. 1a and Extended Data Fig. 2a)

None of the models was better than the 'no change' baseline at predicting genetic interactions (Fig. 1c), and the same ranking was observed with other metrics (Extended Data Fig. 4). Fig. 1c and Extended Data Fig. 4 were not extracted.

Descriptive fact transcribed from the pinned source.

Evidence

Source checking verifies the cited claim or transcription. It does not establish independent reproduction.

Evidence table

Inspect claims, sources and review details

Trace each statement to its source and review. A context-only reference supports the record generally; it does not verify an individual field. Source checking does not reproduce an experiment.

One row per statement and cited source. Multiple citations are not independent evaluations. Shared locators are labelled explicitly.

6 evidence rows matching the loaded filters

Claims, original sources and review scope · Release 2026-10-22-1b7cf027e4f6
Property and statementOriginal source and locationReview and provenance
Claimed field
genetic_interaction_finding
Context-only references
Deep-learning-based gene perturbation effect prediction does not yet outperform simple linear baselines

Original source ↗

Main text paragraphs 8 and 9

Version: Nature Methods 22(8):1657, published online 2025-08-04; PMC12328236 full-text XML
Retrieved: 2026-10-11T00:48:13Z

not individually reviewed

No individual claim review recorded

Audit details

Field: attributes.field

Source artifact SHA-256: dc5ccf62cb51d301f327a3c3e629d60be719bb2aaf02b57fb4999be43a4d95c7

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Inspected artifact

Source location
Main text paragraphs 8 and 9
Context-only references
Deep-learning-based gene perturbation effect prediction does not yet outperform simple linear baselines

Original source ↗

Main text paragraphs 8 and 9

Version: Nature Methods 22(8):1657, published online 2025-08-04; PMC12328236 full-text XML
Retrieved: 2026-10-11T00:48:13Z

not individually reviewed

No individual claim review recorded

Audit details

Field: attributes.source_locator

Source artifact SHA-256: dc5ccf62cb51d301f327a3c3e629d60be719bb2aaf02b57fb4999be43a4d95c7

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Inspected artifact

Claimed value
None of the models was better than the 'no change' baseline at predicting genetic interactions (Fig. 1c), and the same ranking was observed with other metrics (Extended Data Fig. 4). Fig. 1c and Extended Data Fig. 4 were not extracted.
Context-only references
Deep-learning-based gene perturbation effect prediction does not yet outperform simple linear baselines

Original source ↗

Main text paragraphs 8 and 9

Version: Nature Methods 22(8):1657, published online 2025-08-04; PMC12328236 full-text XML
Retrieved: 2026-10-11T00:48:13Z

not individually reviewed

No individual claim review recorded

Audit details

Field: attributes.value

Source artifact SHA-256: dc5ccf62cb51d301f327a3c3e629d60be719bb2aaf02b57fb4999be43a4d95c7

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Inspected artifact

Description
Descriptive fact transcribed from the pinned source.
Context-only references
Deep-learning-based gene perturbation effect prediction does not yet outperform simple linear baselines

Original source ↗

Main text paragraphs 8 and 9

Version: Nature Methods 22(8):1657, published online 2025-08-04; PMC12328236 full-text XML
Retrieved: 2026-10-11T00:48:13Z

not individually reviewed

No individual claim review recorded

Audit details

Field: description

Source artifact SHA-256: dc5ccf62cb51d301f327a3c3e629d60be719bb2aaf02b57fb4999be43a4d95c7

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Inspected artifact

Relationship: subject
perturbation-ahlmann-20261011-protocol-norman-double
Context-only references
Deep-learning-based gene perturbation effect prediction does not yet outperform simple linear baselines

Original source ↗

Main text paragraphs 8 and 9

Version: Nature Methods 22(8):1657, published online 2025-08-04; PMC12328236 full-text XML
Retrieved: 2026-10-11T00:48:13Z

not individually reviewed

No individual claim review recorded

Audit details

Field: links:subject:perturbation-ahlmann-20261011-protocol-norman-double

Source artifact SHA-256: dc5ccf62cb51d301f327a3c3e629d60be719bb2aaf02b57fb4999be43a4d95c7

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Inspected artifact

Name
genetic_interaction_finding: perturbation-ahlmann-20261011-protocol-norman-double
Context-only references
Deep-learning-based gene perturbation effect prediction does not yet outperform simple linear baselines

Original source ↗

Main text paragraphs 8 and 9

Version: Nature Methods 22(8):1657, published online 2025-08-04; PMC12328236 full-text XML
Retrieved: 2026-10-11T00:48:13Z

not individually reviewed

No individual claim review recorded

Audit details

Field: name

Source artifact SHA-256: dc5ccf62cb51d301f327a3c3e629d60be719bb2aaf02b57fb4999be43a4d95c7

Hash scope: Hash scope not separately documented; inspect source record

Inspected artifact

Sources and history

Release 2026-10-22-1b7cf027e4f6 · Record review: source checked

1 source record and release historyDownload this release (gzip)
Technical metadata and extraction receipts

Stable ID: perturbation-ahlmann-20261011-claim-double-interactions-no-change

field
genetic_interaction_finding
value
None of the models was better than the 'no change' baseline at predicting genetic interactions (Fig. 1c), and the same ranking was observed with other metrics (Extended Data Fig. 4). Fig. 1c and Extended Data Fig. 4 were not extracted.
source locator
Main text paragraphs 8 and 9
review
method: source-hash-verification; ai-assisted-source-review; reviewer: claude; reviewer note: Separate Claude (Opus 5.5) review agent, independent of the extractor; no human review claimed; reviewed at: 2026-10-11T03:00:00Z; artifact sha256: dc5ccf62cb51d301f327a3c3e629d60be719bb2aaf02b57fb4999be43a4d95c7; retrieval url: https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC12328236/fullTextXML; method note: Compared the claim with the cited paragraph of the re-downloaded article XML.; note: Hand transcription by the extractor. Independent review 2026-10-11: matches the source.
Related records

Suggest a correction