Configuration

scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)

Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons

Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4

Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption

Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio

scFoundation zero-shot GRN from cosine similarity of last-layer hidden states aggregated over cells (undirected).

56 evaluations · 112 results 2 open disagreements between studies involve its model

Overview

An explanatory profile has not yet been reviewed for this record.

Consult the linked sources for architecture or protocol details. Missing evidence is not evidence of a missing capability.

Evaluations and results

56 evaluations · 112 results. Different protocols are not a single leaderboard.

Filter evaluations

Tested model or methodProtocolDatasetEvaluation setupMetricEvidence origin

Applied filters: All linked evaluations

Exact evaluated configurations and original reported results
Tested configuration	Protocol and dataset	Finding	Evidence and details
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE hESC, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	0.915 AUPRC ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on hESC, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-cell-type-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, block 'Cell-type-specific', row 'hESC', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE hESC, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	0.923 Early precision ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on hESC, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-cell-type-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 5, block 'Cell-type-specific', row 'hESC', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE hHep, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	0.916 AUPRC ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on hHep, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-cell-type-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, block 'Cell-type-specific', row 'hHep', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE hHep, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	0.905 Early precision ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on hHep, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-cell-type-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 5, block 'Cell-type-specific', row 'hHep', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE mDC, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	1.09 AUPRC ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on mDC, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-cell-type-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, block 'Cell-type-specific', row 'mDC', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE mDC, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	1.13 Early precision ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on mDC, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-cell-type-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 5, block 'Cell-type-specific', row 'mDC', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE mHSC-E, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	0.914 AUPRC ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on mHSC-E, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-cell-type-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, block 'Cell-type-specific', row 'mHSC-E', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE mHSC-E, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	0.944 Early precision ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on mHSC-E, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-cell-type-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 5, block 'Cell-type-specific', row 'mHSC-E', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE mHSC-GM, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	0.86 AUPRC ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on mHSC-GM, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-cell-type-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, block 'Cell-type-specific', row 'mHSC-GM', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE mHSC-GM, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	0.909 Early precision ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on mHSC-GM, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-cell-type-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 5, block 'Cell-type-specific', row 'mHSC-GM', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE mHSC-L, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	1.01 AUPRC ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on mHSC-L, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-cell-type-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, block 'Cell-type-specific', row 'mHSC-L', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE mHSC-L, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	1.06 Early precision ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on mHSC-L, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-cell-type-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 5, block 'Cell-type-specific', row 'mHSC-L', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: Six BEELINE datasets, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	0.951 AUPRC ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference; mean across six datasets) unitless · higher Uncertainty: SD 0.083 Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on six BEELINE datasets (mean), TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-cell-type-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, block 'Cell-type-specific', row 'mean', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: Six BEELINE datasets, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	0.978 Early precision ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; cell-type-specific ChIP-seq reference; mean across six datasets) unitless · higher Uncertainty: SD 0.094 Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on six BEELINE datasets (mean), TFs+1000, cell-type-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-cell-type-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 5, block 'Cell-type-specific', row 'mean', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE hESC, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	1.04 AUPRC ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; non-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on hESC, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-non-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, block 'Nonspecific', row 'hESC', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE hESC, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	0.818 Early precision ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; non-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on hESC, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-non-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 5, block 'Nonspecific', row 'hESC', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE hHep, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	1.38 AUPRC ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; non-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on hHep, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-non-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, block 'Nonspecific', row 'hHep', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE hHep, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	2.61 Early precision ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; non-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on hHep, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-non-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 5, block 'Nonspecific', row 'hHep', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE mDC, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	1.26 AUPRC ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; non-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on mDC, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-non-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, block 'Nonspecific', row 'mDC', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE mDC, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	1.86 Early precision ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; non-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on mDC, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-non-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 5, block 'Nonspecific', row 'mDC', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE mHSC-E, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	1.14 AUPRC ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; non-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on mHSC-E, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-non-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, block 'Nonspecific', row 'mHSC-E', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE mHSC-E, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	1.58 Early precision ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; non-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on mHSC-E, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-non-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 5, block 'Nonspecific', row 'mHSC-E', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE mHSC-GM, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	1.17 AUPRC ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; non-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on mHSC-GM, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-non-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, block 'Nonspecific', row 'mHSC-GM', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE mHSC-GM, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	1.14 Early precision ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; non-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on mHSC-GM, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-non-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 5, block 'Nonspecific', row 'mHSC-GM', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'
Configuration: scFoundation coshid GRN (Ye et al. 2026)	Protocol: Ye et al. 2026 GRN reconstruction, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq reference Dataset subset: BEELINE mHSC-L, TFs+1000 (Ye et al. 2026)	1.12 AUPRC ratio (TFs+1000 gene set; non-specific ChIP-seq reference) unitless · higher Uncertainty: Not reported by the source Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible	Independent external evaluation · Source checked Evidence concern: excluded from comparisons Table 1 labels its middle reference column 'ChIP-seq' and the caption names cell-type-specific ChIP-seq, but its values equal the 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean and std rows of Tables 4 and 6 (for example scGPT costok EPR 4.211±1.703), and Appendix B says cell-type-specific ChIP-seq is excluded from the main comparison. Table 1 is therefore not extracted; Tables 4-7 carry the reference labels.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 1 caption and column header; Tables 4 and 6, 'Nonspecific ChIP-seq' mean rows; Appendix B text before Table 4 Table 6 is titled 'AUPR' and Table 7 'AUPRC', but both print ratios over a random predictor (values above 1), matching the 'AUPRC ratio' of Table 1; both are recorded as auprc-ratio.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 6 and Table 7 captions; Table 1 caption Table 7 (TFs+1000 AUPRC) repeats Table 6 (TFs+500 AUPR) exactly in the GENIE3 column of the STRING, Cell-type-specific ChIP-seq and Nonspecific ChIP-seq blocks: all 18 dataset values and the three mean and std rows are identical (for example STRING hESC 1.6241, mean 3.301, std 2.244). Only the OmniPath block differs. Every other column, and GENIE3 in the EPR Tables 4 and 5, differs between the two gene sets, and the Table 6 values match Table 1. These 21 Table 7 GENIE3 values are likely a copy of the TFs+500 values and should not be compared.Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, column group 'ML', column 'GENIE3', blocks 'STRING', 'Cell-type-specific' and 'Nonspecific'; Table 6, same cells; Table 1, GENIE3 AUPRC ratio Methods, coverage and source scFoundation coshid GRN on mHSC-L, TFs+1000, non-specific ChIP-seq lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-protocol-tf-plus-1000-non-specific-chip-seq Aggregation: Not reported Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Table 7, block 'Nonspecific', row 'mHSC-L', column group 'coshid', column 'scFoundation'

Source checking is not independent reproduction. Release 2026-10-23-5347695500ed.

Use this configuration

How it works, versions and access

Additional methodological details, versions and access terms have not yet been extracted into a structured profile for this configuration. Consult the linked sources and evaluation records below.

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.

0 evidence rows matching the loaded filters

Claims, original sources and review scope · Release 2026-10-23-5347695500ed
Property and statement	Original source and location	Review and provenance

No evidence rows match these filters. Choose another scope or clear the search.

How to read the evidence

Sources and history

Release 2026-10-23-5347695500ed · Record review: source checked

1 source record and release history

Benchmarking Static Gene Regulatory Network Reconstruction and Dynamic Transition Probing in Single-Cell Foundation Models · Original source · bioRxiv preprint version 1, posted 2026-05-20

Download this release (gzip)

Technical metadata and extraction receipts

Stable ID: lit-cells-networks-20261011-ye2026grn-config-scfoundation-coshid

areas: biological-networks; single-cell
contexts: research
method types: foundation_model
reported name: scFoundation coshid
foundation model eligible: true
training setting: Zero-shot; pretrained weights, no fine-tuning
representation: cosine similarity of last-layer hidden states aggregated over cells (undirected)
source locator: Section 2.2; Table 3; Appendix A.2
missing metadata: version: reason: unreported; note: Source names no checkpoint; Table 3 gives size, layers and pretraining cells

Related records

Suggest a correction