rewire.itbenchmarks
Configuration

PhyloGPN

PhyloGPN learns genomic representations with a phylogeny-aware objective and predicts from single sequences.

SourcesA Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling · Abstract (paragraph 1); Discussion and Conclusion (paragraph 1)

1 evaluation · 1 result

How it worksEvaluated procedure (conceptual)
Evaluated procedure (conceptual)1. DNA sequence at inference. Then: 2. PhyloGPN. Then: 3. Sequence representations and variant-effect scoresEvaluated procedure (conceptual)1. DNA sequence at inference. Then: 2. PhyloGPN. Then: 3. Sequence representations and variant-effect scoresEvaluated procedure (conceptual)1. DNA sequence at inference. Then: 2. PhyloGPN. Then: 3. Sequence representations and variant-effect scores

Conceptual input–method–output guide. Check the procedure text and linked evaluation for fitted components, additional inputs and exact settings.

SourcesA Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling · Abstract (paragraph 1); Discussion and Conclusion (paragraph 1)

Overview

limited source coverage · Automated source review, 2026-09-16. All specifications and missing details

Evaluations and results

1 evaluation · 1 result. Different protocols are not a single leaderboard.

Filter evaluations

Applied filters: All linked evaluations

Exact evaluated configurations and original reported results
Tested configurationProtocol and datasetFindingEvidence and details
Configuration: PhyloGPNTask: ClinVar 3-prime UTR variant classification
Dataset: ClinVar 3-prime UTR variants
0.94 AUROC
fraction · unknown

Uncertainty: Not reported

Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible

Author-reported evaluation · Source checked
Methods, coverage and source

PhyloGPN: ClinVar 3-prime UTR variant classification

log-likelihood-ratio scoring

Aggregation: Not reported

A Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling · Table 1, 3-prime UTR row, PhyloGPN AUROC column

Source checking is not independent reproduction. Release 2026-09-29-06401fd5b220.

Use this model

How it works, versions and access

How it works

How the evaluated method works

Multispecies whole-genome alignments and phylogenetic trees enter the training loss to model nucleotide evolution. They are not required as inputs for downstream single-sequence prediction.

SourcesA Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling · Abstract (paragraph 1); Discussion and Conclusion (paragraph 1)
What was evaluated

The linked evaluation record identifies PhyloGPN: ClinVar 3-prime UTR variant classification. Its dataset, split, adaptation and evidence origin remain attached to the reported results.

SourcesA Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling · The named evaluation’s methods and comparison table; exact preserved evaluation IDs: evaluation-b2-phylogpn-2025
Strengths, limitations and unresolved questions

Strengths and limitations

Strengths and considerations

  • Uses evolutionary information during training while retaining sequence-only inference.
    SourcesA Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling · Background and Related Work/Transfer Learning and Genomic Language Models (gLMs) (paragraph 2); Results/Embedding Evaluation (paragraph 4)

Limitations and conditions

  • Sequence-only inference does not imply sequence-only training; alignment quality and phylogenetic assumptions remain relevant.
    SourcesA Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling · Abstract (paragraph 1); Background and Related Work/Molecular Phylogenetics (paragraph 1)
Profile review details

Primary full text and the available official implementation/model documentation were inspected. Explanatory claims are source-backed; unresolved exact-configuration metadata is labelled explicitly. This is automated review, not a human review or independent benchmark reproduction.

Stable record: reported-model-cbbe04b826ceff

Specifications

Inputs, training, access and other details

Explanatory profile: limited source coverage · Automated source review, 2026-09-16. Review applies to the cited claims; unresolved fields are listed below. Numerical results retain their own review status.

Inputs, outputs and configuration
PropertyDescription and evidence
Model typeStudy-specific predictive method; this record is the paper-specific evaluated configuration.
SourcesA Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling · Abstract (paragraph 1); Discussion and Conclusion (paragraph 1)
Architecture / procedureMultispecies whole-genome alignments and phylogenetic trees enter the training loss to model nucleotide evolution. They are not required as inputs for downstream single-sequence prediction.
SourcesA Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling · Abstract (paragraph 1); Discussion and Conclusion (paragraph 1)
Biological inputsDNA sequence at inference; multispecies alignment and tree information during training
SourcesA Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling · Abstract (paragraph 1); Background and Related Work/Molecular Phylogenetics (paragraph 1)
OutputsSequence representations and variant-effect scores
SourcesA Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling · Results/Embedding Evaluation (paragraph 1); Introduction (paragraph 3)
ParametersAbout 83M stored parameters; reverse-complement weight tying means the number of free parameters is roughly half the weights and biases, plus layer-normalisation parameters.
SourcesA Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling · Methods/Architecture and Training (paragraph 1); Methods/Loss Function (paragraph 1)
Known versions / configurationPhyloGPN is the comparison-table label; that label does not specify an immutable weight revision. · Not reported in inspected sources
SourcesA Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling · Model identification in the comparison table and corresponding Methods; immutable checkpoint revision is not supplied by the table label.
Training data / fittingMultispecies whole-genome alignment with explicit phylogenetic modelling.
SourcesA Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling · Methods/Training Data (paragraph 2); Methods/Training Data (paragraph 1)
Context limitsA 481-bp receptive field from 40 dilated residual blocks; training consumes approximately 10-kb alignment blocks, a different quantity.
SourcesA Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling · Methods/Architecture and Training (paragraph 1); Methods/Architecture and Training (paragraph 2)
AccessOfficial study implementation and usage documentation: https://github.com/songlab-cal/gpn/blob/6f28c81bcbfe7d65cb6d8ece9ce88f87ca583791/README.md. This pinned documentation revision is not automatically the evaluated weight revision.
Sourcessonglab-cal/gpn README.md · README.md; installation, model download and usage instructions
Code licenceMIT (study repository code at the cited revision; this does not establish every dependency or historical checkpoint licence).
Sourcessonglab-cal/gpn LICENSE · LICENSE; complete licence text
Weights licenceThe inspected model-access documentation does not explicitly identify terms for this exact evaluated checkpoint or fitted head; repository code terms are shown separately. · Not reported in inspected sources
Sourcessonglab-cal/gpn README.md · README.md; checkpoint/access documentation and licence scope

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.

19 evidence rows matching the loaded filters

Claims, original sources and review scope · Release 2026-09-29-06401fd5b220
Property and statementOriginal source and locationReview and provenance
Diagram caption
Conceptual input–method–output guide. Check the procedure text and linked evaluation for fitted components, additional inputs and exact settings.
Individual claims
A Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling

Original source ↗

Abstract (paragraph 1); Discussion and Conclusion (paragraph 1)

Version: preprint version in PMC
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:38:57.558218+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Primary full text and the available official implementation/model documentation were inspected. Explanatory claims are source-backed; unresolved exact-configuration metadata is labelled explicitly. This is automated review, not a human review or independent benchmark reproduction.

Field: attributes.profile.diagram.caption

Source artifact SHA-256: 807f3a26cbfa9b5ce238d92164bd523302c67d1c5794b08273c51cca1acd4224

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

Inspected artifact

Diagram steps
  • DNA sequence at inference
  • PhyloGPN
  • Sequence representations and variant-effect scores
Individual claims
A Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling

Original source ↗

Abstract (paragraph 1); Discussion and Conclusion (paragraph 1)

Version: preprint version in PMC
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:38:57.558218+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Primary full text and the available official implementation/model documentation were inspected. Explanatory claims are source-backed; unresolved exact-configuration metadata is labelled explicitly. This is automated review, not a human review or independent benchmark reproduction.

Field: attributes.profile.diagram.steps

Source artifact SHA-256: 807f3a26cbfa9b5ce238d92164bd523302c67d1c5794b08273c51cca1acd4224

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

Inspected artifact

Diagram title
Evaluated procedure (conceptual)
Individual claims
A Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling

Original source ↗

Abstract (paragraph 1); Discussion and Conclusion (paragraph 1)

Version: preprint version in PMC
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:38:57.558218+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Primary full text and the available official implementation/model documentation were inspected. Explanatory claims are source-backed; unresolved exact-configuration metadata is labelled explicitly. This is automated review, not a human review or independent benchmark reproduction.

Field: attributes.profile.diagram.title

Source artifact SHA-256: 807f3a26cbfa9b5ce238d92164bd523302c67d1c5794b08273c51cca1acd4224

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

Inspected artifact

Model type
Study-specific predictive method; this record is the paper-specific evaluated configuration.
Individual claims
A Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling

Original source ↗

Abstract (paragraph 1); Discussion and Conclusion (paragraph 1)

Version: preprint version in PMC
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:38:57.558218+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Primary full text and the available official implementation/model documentation were inspected. Explanatory claims are source-backed; unresolved exact-configuration metadata is labelled explicitly. This is automated review, not a human review or independent benchmark reproduction.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.0.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 807f3a26cbfa9b5ce238d92164bd523302c67d1c5794b08273c51cca1acd4224

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

Inspected artifact

Architecture / procedure
Multispecies whole-genome alignments and phylogenetic trees enter the training loss to model nucleotide evolution. They are not required as inputs for downstream single-sequence prediction.
Individual claims
A Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling

Original source ↗

Abstract (paragraph 1); Discussion and Conclusion (paragraph 1)

Version: preprint version in PMC
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:38:57.558218+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Primary full text and the available official implementation/model documentation were inspected. Explanatory claims are source-backed; unresolved exact-configuration metadata is labelled explicitly. This is automated review, not a human review or independent benchmark reproduction.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.1.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 807f3a26cbfa9b5ce238d92164bd523302c67d1c5794b08273c51cca1acd4224

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

Inspected artifact

Weights licence
The inspected model-access documentation does not explicitly identify terms for this exact evaluated checkpoint or fitted head; repository code terms are shown separately.
Individual claims
songlab-cal/gpn README.md

Original source ↗

README.md; checkpoint/access documentation and licence scope

Version: 6f28c81bcbfe7d65cb6d8ece9ce88f87ca583791
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T19:54:20.313775+00:00

unreported

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Primary full text and the available official implementation/model documentation were inspected. Explanatory claims are source-backed; unresolved exact-configuration metadata is labelled explicitly. This is automated review, not a human review or independent benchmark reproduction.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.10.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 0312fb9646aef630a30cd3039337b31a48f4345f4dd1cdd71edcc483afd8b9d0

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

Inspected artifact

Biological inputs
DNA sequence at inference; multispecies alignment and tree information during training
Individual claims
A Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling

Original source ↗

Abstract (paragraph 1); Background and Related Work/Molecular Phylogenetics (paragraph 1)

Version: preprint version in PMC
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:38:57.558218+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Primary full text and the available official implementation/model documentation were inspected. Explanatory claims are source-backed; unresolved exact-configuration metadata is labelled explicitly. This is automated review, not a human review or independent benchmark reproduction.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.2.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 807f3a26cbfa9b5ce238d92164bd523302c67d1c5794b08273c51cca1acd4224

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

Inspected artifact

Outputs
Sequence representations and variant-effect scores
Individual claims
A Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling

Original source ↗

Results/Embedding Evaluation (paragraph 1); Introduction (paragraph 3)

Version: preprint version in PMC
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:38:57.558218+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Primary full text and the available official implementation/model documentation were inspected. Explanatory claims are source-backed; unresolved exact-configuration metadata is labelled explicitly. This is automated review, not a human review or independent benchmark reproduction.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.3.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 807f3a26cbfa9b5ce238d92164bd523302c67d1c5794b08273c51cca1acd4224

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

Inspected artifact

Parameters
About 83M stored parameters; reverse-complement weight tying means the number of free parameters is roughly half the weights and biases, plus layer-normalisation parameters.
Individual claims
A Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling

Original source ↗

Methods/Architecture and Training (paragraph 1); Methods/Loss Function (paragraph 1)

Version: preprint version in PMC
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:38:57.558218+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Primary full text and the available official implementation/model documentation were inspected. Explanatory claims are source-backed; unresolved exact-configuration metadata is labelled explicitly. This is automated review, not a human review or independent benchmark reproduction.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.4.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 807f3a26cbfa9b5ce238d92164bd523302c67d1c5794b08273c51cca1acd4224

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

Inspected artifact

Known versions / configuration
PhyloGPN is the comparison-table label; that label does not specify an immutable weight revision.
Individual claims
A Phylogenetic Approach to Genomic Language Modeling

Original source ↗

Model identification in the comparison table and corresponding Methods; immutable checkpoint revision is not supplied by the table label.

Version: preprint version in PMC
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T10:38:57.558218+00:00

unreported

automated source review · 2026-09-16

Audit details

Primary full text and the available official implementation/model documentation were inspected. Explanatory claims are source-backed; unresolved exact-configuration metadata is labelled explicitly. This is automated review, not a human review or independent benchmark reproduction.

Field: attributes.profile.facts.5.value

Source artifact SHA-256: 807f3a26cbfa9b5ce238d92164bd523302c67d1c5794b08273c51cca1acd4224

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

Inspected artifact

Sources and history

View linked audit checks and correction history

Release 2026-09-29-06401fd5b220 · Record review: needs review

3 source records and release historyDownload this release
Technical metadata and extraction receipts

Stable ID: reported-model-cbbe04b826ceff

areas
dna-genomes
entity level
method
version
not stated in table
reported name
PhyloGPN
historical missing metadata
checkpoint revision: not_reported_in_legacy_extract; training data: not_reported_in_legacy_extract; licence: not_reported_in_legacy_extract
metadata review scope
historical_missing_metadata preserves the original discovery state. Current descriptive evidence and missingness are recorded in profile.facts; numerical-result review is separate.
legacy kinds
model
entity classification
review date: 2026-09-17; rationale: This source-scoped entry preserves the method/configuration actually named in an evaluation. It is neither a global family identity nor proof of an immutable checkpoint; the linked evaluation retains adaptation, fitting and scoring details.; source ids: phylogpn-2025; source locator: Abstract (paragraph 1); Discussion and Conclusion (paragraph 1); ambiguities: Configuration means the source-labelled evaluated identity. It does not establish missing checkpoint hashes, default settings or equivalence to same-named records in other papers.
Related records

Suggest a correction