A mechanistically interpretable neural network for regulatory genomics
Alex M. Tseng, Gokcen Eraslan, Tommaso Biancalani, Gabriele Scalia

TL;DR
This paper introduces a new neural network architecture for regulatory genomics that directly encodes and reveals motifs and their syntax, improving interpretability and motif discovery over traditional methods.
Contribution
The authors present a novel, fully expressive, and interpretable neural network architecture that directly encodes regulatory motifs and syntax from learned weights and activations.
Findings
Excels in de novo motif discovery and motif instance calling
Robust to variable sequence contexts
Enables interpretable generation of functional sequences
Abstract
Deep neural networks excel in mapping genomic DNA sequences to associated readouts (e.g., protein-DNA binding). Beyond prediction, the goal of these networks is to reveal to scientists the underlying motifs (and their syntax) which drive genome regulation. Traditional methods that extract motifs from convolutional filters suffer from the uninterpretable dispersion of information across filters and layers. Other methods which rely on importance scores can be unstable and unreliable. Instead, we designed a novel mechanistically interpretable architecture for regulatory genomics, where motifs and their syntax are directly encoded and readable from the learned weights and activations. We provide theoretical and empirical evidence of our architecture's full expressivity, while still being highly interpretable. Through several experiments, we show that our architecture excels in de novo motif…
Peer Reviews
Decision·Submitted to ICLR 2025
- The proposed ARGMINN model brings the mechanistically interpretable architecture into a classical DNN architecture, trying to address the Interpretability challenge in applying deep learning to genomics. - The authors provide theoretical proofs showing that their model can recognize all motif configurations. - ARGMINN shows superior performance across all tasks, compared to baselines (e.g. CNNs and ExplaiNN). And the authors also showcase the model's ability to generate novel functional seque
- The evaluation strategy used in the paper involves reserving chr8 and chr10 for validation and chr1 for testing, while training on all other chromosomes. However, because chromosomes can vary in genomic features, using a specific chromosome split might introduce biases in performance evaluation. - Since the paper introduces a memory stream into the attention mechanism, it would be helpful to include a discussion on the training times and memory usage of the model.
The paper is targeting at an important task, and shows many cases for each evaluated task, which is straightforward.
1. The paper is hard to follow. After reading the manuscript, I know the authors develop a new architecture consisting of several components, and each of them achieves a specific function. However, I cannot figure out the detailed contributions of this paper. That is to say, what are the differences of the proposed architecture compared to previous method? 2. The experimental settings and results are not complete.: 2.1 The paper didn't show any specific number on the evaluated tasks. All resul
1. This paper successfully applied the MI methods to the regulatory genomics domain 2. This paper provided thorough assessment for the usage of ARGMINN 3. The authors provided detailed related works and theoretical results based on first-order logic
1. I find this work may be not interesting to the most readers of ICLR. This paper should fall into a biological journal (e.g. journals for stastical geomics) 2. The technologies introduced in this paper are actually not based on biological mechanics but common mechanical Interpretation tricks including regularizations, separate convolutions and attention for interpretability.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsGene Regulatory Network Analysis
