Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Gene Set Summarization using Large Language Models

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2305.13338 v3 pith:5CUW4JJO submitted 2023-05-21 q-bio.GN cs.AIcs.CLq-bio.QM

Gene Set Summarization using Large Language Models

classification q-bio.GN cs.AIcs.CLq-bio.QM
keywords geneanalysisenrichmentliststermlanguagemethodsmodels
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Molecular biologists frequently interpret gene lists derived from high-throughput experiments and computational analysis. This is typically done as a statistical enrichment analysis that measures the over- or under-representation of biological function terms associated with genes or their properties, based on curated assertions from a knowledge base (KB) such as the Gene Ontology (GO). Interpreting gene lists can also be framed as a textual summarization task, enabling the use of Large Language Models (LLMs), potentially utilizing scientific texts directly and avoiding reliance on a KB. We developed SPINDOCTOR (Structured Prompt Interpolation of Natural Language Descriptions of Controlled Terms for Ontology Reporting), a method that uses GPT models to perform gene set function summarization as a complement to standard enrichment analysis. This method can use different sources of gene functional information: (1) structured text derived from curated ontological KB annotations, (2) ontology-free narrative gene summaries, or (3) direct model retrieval. We demonstrate that these methods are able to generate plausible and biologically valid summary GO term lists for gene sets. However, GPT-based approaches are unable to deliver reliable scores or p-values and often return terms that are not statistically significant. Crucially, these methods were rarely able to recapitulate the most precise and informative term from standard enrichment, likely due to an inability to generalize and reason using an ontology. Results are highly nondeterministic, with minor variations in prompt resulting in radically different term lists. Our results show that at this point, LLM-based methods are unsuitable as a replacement for standard term enrichment analysis and that manual curation of ontological assertions remains necessary.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Discrimination by LLMs: Cross-lingual Bias Assessment and Mitigation in Decision-Making and Summarisation

    cs.CL 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0

    LLMs show significant demographic bias in decision-making, favoring women, younger ages, and certain minority backgrounds; summarization shows little bias, and bias patterns largely transfer from English to Dutch.

  2. BRAINCELL-AID: An Agentic AI Created Brain Cell Type Resource for Community Annotation

    cs.AI 2025-10 conditional novelty 5.0

    BRAINCELL-AID uses an agentic LLM workflow with RAG to produce annotations for 21,275 marker gene sets across 5,322 mouse brain clusters, though its headline accuracy barely exceeds a random baseline.