rewirebio.iobenchmarks
Evaluation

Harmony UMAP-projected embedding on evaluated datasets (Kedzierska et al. 2025)

Published comparison transcribed from the pinned source; not reproduced.

Evaluation 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: Harmony (Kedzierska et al. 2025)Protocol: Kedzierska et al. 2025 cell embedding scoring after UMAP projection
Dataset subset: Evaluated datasets, aggregated (Kedzierska et al. 2025)
2 Rank (overall average ranking across datasets, based on mean biological-conservation and batch-mixing scores (1 = best); UMAP projection of the embedding)
unitless · lower

Uncertainty: Not reported by the source

Coverage: Not reported scored / Not reported eligible

Independent external evaluation · Source checked
Methods, coverage and source

Harmony UMAP-projected embedding on evaluated datasets (Kedzierska et al. 2025)

gfm-guides-20261014-kedzierska2025-protocol-umap-embedding

Aggregation: Not reported

Kedzierska et al. 2025, Additional file 1 (Supplementary Tables S1-S7, xlsx) · Additional file 1, sheet 'TableS5' cell B4, row 'Harmony', column 'Average ranking'

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

Research readiness

0 of 4 readiness checks met. These checks assess whether the evidence supports a reproducible investigation; a source-checked score alone does not meet them.

Readiness checks, gaps and artifacts

Release 2026-10-23-5347695500ed · Evidence verified: Not verified

Evidence incomplete

Replay metrics

Exact outcomes, predictions, identifiers and evaluator are connected.

Missing or unresolved evidence

  • No verified artifact manifest is linked to this exact record.
  • File checksums match the recorded files: not yet verified
  • Predictions are matched to the right samples: not yet verified
  • Score meaning and direction are confirmed: not yet verified
  • Metrics are recomputed from the saved predictions: not yet verified

Verified: Not verified

Evidence incomplete

Investigate discrepancies

Replay evidence includes annotations and an assessment of dependence. Unknown independence permits descriptive analysis only.

Missing or unresolved evidence

  • No verified artifact manifest is linked to this exact record.
  • File checksums match the recorded files: not yet verified
  • Predictions are matched to the right samples: not yet verified
  • Score meaning and direction are confirmed: not yet verified
  • Metrics are recomputed from the saved predictions: not yet verified
  • Sample annotations are recorded: not yet verified
  • Dependence between samples is assessed: not yet verified

Verified: Not verified

Evidence incomplete

Run locally

A pinned recipe describes the inputs, environment and resource requirements.

Missing or unresolved evidence

  • No verified artifact manifest is linked to this exact record.
  • File checksums match the recorded files: not yet verified
  • Predictions are matched to the right samples: not yet verified
  • Score meaning and direction are confirmed: not yet verified
  • A pinned run recipe exists: not yet verified
  • Compute requirements are estimated: not yet verified

Verified: Not verified

Evidence incomplete

Validate independently

Separate data and exposure records support an independent test.

Missing or unresolved evidence

  • No verified artifact manifest is linked to this exact record.
  • File checksums match the recorded files: not yet verified
  • Predictions are matched to the right samples: not yet verified
  • Score meaning and direction are confirmed: not yet verified
  • Independent validation data exist: not yet verified
  • Overlap with training data is checked: not yet verified

Verified: Not verified

Readiness describes the evidence in this release. Availability on your computer is checked separately when an investigation runs. Existing data exposure can prevent independent validation even when files are available.

Artifacts and reproduction

No verified artifact manifest is connected to this record yet. The gaps above identify what is needed before analysis can begin.

Evaluation procedure

Kedzierska et al. 2025 cell embedding scoring after UMAP projection

Configuration
Harmony (Kedzierska et al. 2025)
Protocol
Kedzierska et al. 2025 cell embedding scoring after UMAP projection
Dataset subset
Evaluated datasets, aggregated (Kedzierska et al. 2025)
origin
Independent external evaluation
configuration
Genome Biology 26:101 and Additional file 1 as retrieved 2026-10-14
protocol id
gfm-guides-20261014-kedzierska2025-protocol-umap-embedding
dataset version
Not reported
split
No split; each whole dataset embedded and scored
population
Not reported
inputs
Each dataset's expression matrix with cell-type and batch labels; 2,000 HVG standard across experiments
adaptation
scGPT and Geneformer zero-shot from pretrained weights (scGPT random: no pretraining); scVI and Harmony fitted on each dataset with batch labels; HVG computed from each dataset
metric implementation
scib 1.0.4. ASW of cell-type labels rescaled to [0, 1]; NMI and ARI on Louvain clusters at the resolution with the highest NMI out of 20; batch integration = 1 minus absolute batch silhouette per cell type, averaged; PCR = change in variance explained by batch between the original data and the embedding (Methods, pages 9-10).
aggregation
Across the evaluated datasets; each result states its ranking basis (Table S3: median score per metric; Tables S4 and S5: average ranking from mean scores)
budget
Not reported

Metadata review: source checked. Unreported conditions prevent automatic comparisons.

Reproduction

Split
No split; each whole dataset embedded and scored
Adaptation
scGPT and Geneformer zero-shot from pretrained weights (scGPT random: no pretraining); scVI and Harmony fitted on each dataset with batch labels; HVG computed from each dataset
Scoring implementation
scib 1.0.4. ASW of cell-type labels rescaled to [0, 1]; NMI and ARI on Louvain clusters at the resolution with the highest NMI out of 20; batch integration = 1 minus absolute batch silhouette per cell type, averaged; PCR = change in variance explained by batch between the original data and the embedding (Methods, pages 9-10).

No execution recipe has been verified for this exact configuration and evaluation. A benchmark's general instructions may use different inputs, splits or model settings.

Reproducing this published result requires matching its model configuration, data, split and scorer. Source checking or a successful smoke test does not establish score reproduction.

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.

36 evidence rows matching the loaded filters

Claims, original sources and review scope · Release 2026-10-23-5347695500ed
Property and statementOriginal source and locationReview and provenance
Comparison: adaptation
scGPT and Geneformer zero-shot from pretrained weights (scGPT random: no pretraining); scVI and Harmony fitted on each dataset with batch labels; HVG computed from each dataset
Context-only references
Kedzierska et al. 2025, Additional file 1 (Supplementary Tables S1-S7, xlsx)

Original source ↗

Additional file 1, sheet 'TableS5', column 'Average ranking'

Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation.

Version: Additional file 1 (13059_2025_3574_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx) of the version of record
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T12:01:36Z

not individually reviewed

No individual claim review recorded

independent paper

Audit details

Field: attributes.comparison.adaptation

Source artifact SHA-256: 7adee1211206c4071981a402617c293048baeeeaf415b68ecd13383678003b5e

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

Inspected artifact

Comparison: adaptation
scGPT and Geneformer zero-shot from pretrained weights (scGPT random: no pretraining); scVI and Harmony fitted on each dataset with batch labels; HVG computed from each dataset
Context-only references
Zero-shot evaluation reveals limitations of single-cell foundation models (Kedzierska et al. 2025, Genome Biology 26:101)

Original source ↗

Additional file 1, sheet 'TableS5', column 'Average ranking'

Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation.

Version: Version of record, Genome Biology 26:101, published 2025-04-18
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T12:01:07Z

not individually reviewed

No individual claim review recorded

independent paper

Audit details

Field: attributes.comparison.adaptation

Source artifact SHA-256: 8efcc5fcb2e35b9a04b1ee9e03581e20fffeb5521a4a4c748a6f9b34f7d3c47f

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

Inspected artifact

Comparison: aggregation
Across the evaluated datasets; each result states its ranking basis (Table S3: median score per metric; Tables S4 and S5: average ranking from mean scores)
Context-only references
Kedzierska et al. 2025, Additional file 1 (Supplementary Tables S1-S7, xlsx)

Original source ↗

Additional file 1, sheet 'TableS5', column 'Average ranking'

Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation.

Version: Additional file 1 (13059_2025_3574_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx) of the version of record
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T12:01:36Z

not individually reviewed

No individual claim review recorded

independent paper

Audit details

Field: attributes.comparison.aggregation

Source artifact SHA-256: 7adee1211206c4071981a402617c293048baeeeaf415b68ecd13383678003b5e

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

Inspected artifact

Comparison: aggregation
Across the evaluated datasets; each result states its ranking basis (Table S3: median score per metric; Tables S4 and S5: average ranking from mean scores)
Context-only references
Zero-shot evaluation reveals limitations of single-cell foundation models (Kedzierska et al. 2025, Genome Biology 26:101)

Original source ↗

Additional file 1, sheet 'TableS5', column 'Average ranking'

Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation.

Version: Version of record, Genome Biology 26:101, published 2025-04-18
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T12:01:07Z

not individually reviewed

No individual claim review recorded

independent paper

Audit details

Field: attributes.comparison.aggregation

Source artifact SHA-256: 8efcc5fcb2e35b9a04b1ee9e03581e20fffeb5521a4a4c748a6f9b34f7d3c47f

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

Inspected artifact

Comparison: budget
Not reported
Context-only references
Kedzierska et al. 2025, Additional file 1 (Supplementary Tables S1-S7, xlsx)

Original source ↗

Additional file 1, sheet 'TableS5', column 'Average ranking'

Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation.

Version: Additional file 1 (13059_2025_3574_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx) of the version of record
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T12:01:36Z

missing or unspecified

No individual claim review recorded

independent paper

Audit details

Field: attributes.comparison.budget

Source artifact SHA-256: 7adee1211206c4071981a402617c293048baeeeaf415b68ecd13383678003b5e

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

Inspected artifact

Comparison: budget
Not reported
Context-only references
Zero-shot evaluation reveals limitations of single-cell foundation models (Kedzierska et al. 2025, Genome Biology 26:101)

Original source ↗

Additional file 1, sheet 'TableS5', column 'Average ranking'

Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation.

Version: Version of record, Genome Biology 26:101, published 2025-04-18
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T12:01:07Z

missing or unspecified

No individual claim review recorded

independent paper

Audit details

Field: attributes.comparison.budget

Source artifact SHA-256: 8efcc5fcb2e35b9a04b1ee9e03581e20fffeb5521a4a4c748a6f9b34f7d3c47f

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

Inspected artifact

Comparison: dataset version
Not reported
Context-only references
Kedzierska et al. 2025, Additional file 1 (Supplementary Tables S1-S7, xlsx)

Original source ↗

Additional file 1, sheet 'TableS5', column 'Average ranking'

Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation.

Version: Additional file 1 (13059_2025_3574_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx) of the version of record
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T12:01:36Z

missing or unspecified

No individual claim review recorded

independent paper

Audit details

Field: attributes.comparison.dataset_version

Source artifact SHA-256: 7adee1211206c4071981a402617c293048baeeeaf415b68ecd13383678003b5e

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

Inspected artifact

Comparison: dataset version
Not reported
Context-only references
Zero-shot evaluation reveals limitations of single-cell foundation models (Kedzierska et al. 2025, Genome Biology 26:101)

Original source ↗

Additional file 1, sheet 'TableS5', column 'Average ranking'

Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation.

Version: Version of record, Genome Biology 26:101, published 2025-04-18
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T12:01:07Z

missing or unspecified

No individual claim review recorded

independent paper

Audit details

Field: attributes.comparison.dataset_version

Source artifact SHA-256: 8efcc5fcb2e35b9a04b1ee9e03581e20fffeb5521a4a4c748a6f9b34f7d3c47f

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

Inspected artifact

Comparison: inputs
Each dataset's expression matrix with cell-type and batch labels; 2,000 HVG standard across experiments
Context-only references
Kedzierska et al. 2025, Additional file 1 (Supplementary Tables S1-S7, xlsx)

Original source ↗

Additional file 1, sheet 'TableS5', column 'Average ranking'

Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation.

Version: Additional file 1 (13059_2025_3574_MOESM1_ESM.xlsx) of the version of record
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T12:01:36Z

not individually reviewed

No individual claim review recorded

independent paper

Audit details

Field: attributes.comparison.inputs

Source artifact SHA-256: 7adee1211206c4071981a402617c293048baeeeaf415b68ecd13383678003b5e

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

Inspected artifact

Comparison: inputs
Each dataset's expression matrix with cell-type and batch labels; 2,000 HVG standard across experiments
Context-only references
Zero-shot evaluation reveals limitations of single-cell foundation models (Kedzierska et al. 2025, Genome Biology 26:101)

Original source ↗

Additional file 1, sheet 'TableS5', column 'Average ranking'

Shared locator for this statement’s cited sources; not a separate locator for each citation.

Version: Version of record, Genome Biology 26:101, published 2025-04-18
Retrieved: 2026-10-14T12:01:07Z

not individually reviewed

No individual claim review recorded

independent paper

Audit details

Field: attributes.comparison.inputs

Source artifact SHA-256: 8efcc5fcb2e35b9a04b1ee9e03581e20fffeb5521a4a4c748a6f9b34f7d3c47f

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

Inspected artifact

How to read the evidence

Sources and history

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

2 source records and release historyDownload this release (gzip)
Technical metadata and extraction receipts

Stable ID: gfm-guides-20261014-kedzierska2025-eval-umap-evaluated-datasets-harmony

areas
single-cell
contexts
research
origin
independent_paper
protocol
gfm-guides-20261014-kedzierska2025-protocol-umap-embedding
version
Genome Biology 26:101 and Additional file 1 as retrieved 2026-10-14
comparison
protocol id: gfm-guides-20261014-kedzierska2025-protocol-umap-embedding; dataset version: Not reported; split: No split; each whole dataset embedded and scored; population: Not reported; inputs: Each dataset's expression matrix with cell-type and batch labels; 2,000 HVG standard across experiments; adaptation: scGPT and Geneformer zero-shot from pretrained weights (scGPT random: no pretraining); scVI and Harmony fitted on each dataset with batch labels; HVG computed from each dataset; metric implementation: scib 1.0.4. ASW of cell-type labels rescaled to [0, 1]; NMI and ARI on Louvain clusters at the resolution with the highest NMI out of 20; batch integration = 1 minus absolute batch silhouette per cell type, averaged; PCR = change in variance explained by batch between the original data and the embedding (Methods, pages 9-10).; aggregation: Across the evaluated datasets; each result states its ranking basis (Table S3: median score per metric; Tables S4 and S5: average ranking from mean scores); budget: Not reported
source locator
Additional file 1, sheet 'TableS5', column 'Average ranking'
missing metadata
comparison.budget: reason: unreported; comparison.dataset version: reason: unreported; comparison.population: reason: unreported
Related records

Suggest a correction