Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 68 references

Tensor Network based Gene Regulatory Network Inference for Single-Cell Transcriptomic Data

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A matrix-product-state pipeline using quantum mutual information and permutation testing recovers a known six-gene B-cell regulatory network and reports a significant PRDM1–PAX5–IRF4 triad.

desk verdict A likeable quantum-inspired GRN pipeline, but the permutation p-values are internally inconsistent, so the recovery claim is not yet supported. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.06891 v1 pith:KWKWSTUT submitted 2025-09-08 q-bio.MN quant-ph

Olatz Sanz Larrarte , Borja Aizpurua , Reza Dastbasteh , Ruben M. Otxoa , Josu Etxezarreta Martinez This is my paper · ORCID
classification q-bio.MNquant-ph
keywords generegulatorynetworkinferencetensornetworksmatrixproductstatequantummutualinformationsingle-cellRNAsequencingGaussianmixturemodelHilbertcurvehigher-orderinteractions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Single-cell transcriptomes are snapshots of which genes are on in each cell, and this paper asks whether those snapshots contain enough information to reconstruct who regulates whom. The authors' proposal is to turn each cell's gene activity pattern into a quantum-like state vector, compress it with a tensor network (a matrix product state), and score every pair and every triple of genes with a nonparametric measure, quantum mutual information, using permutation tests to separate signal from noise. Applied to six genes that control B-cell fate in more than 28,000 lymphoblastoid cells, the method recovers several previously documented regulatory edges, such as PAX5–AICDA and PRDM1–PAX5, and it reports one statistically significant three-gene module, PRDM1–PAX5–IRF4, that pairwise analysis would not reveal. The broader claim is that this quantum-inspired classical pipeline can capture higher-order, nonlinear gene dependencies that standard pairwise correlation or regression methods miss.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is a Matrix Product State (MPS), a compact factorization of an exponentially large tensor into a chain of low-rank tensors whose bond dimensions limit how much correlation can be stored between neighboring genes. The pipeline fits a two-component Gaussian Mixture Model to each gene's expression, binarizes each cell's state to active or inactive, orders genes with a Hilbert space-filling curve so that nearby genes in a principal-component projection stay adjacent in the chain, and forms the empirical quantum state from the frequencies of observed binary patterns. Quantum mutual information is then obtained by contracting the MPS to single- and two-site reduced density matrices, with a separate contraction for the three-site formula $I(i;j;k) = S(i)+S(j)+S(k)-S(ij)-S(ik)-S(jk)+S(ijk)$; positive values indicate synergy and negative values redundancy. Permutation tests (1000 permutations) with one-tailed left and right comparisons turn these scores into p-values, so the network consists only of dependencies unlikely to arise by chance.

What would settle it

Re-run the full pipeline on the same 28,000+ cells with the binarization changed to three-component Gaussian mixtures, percentile thresholds, or raw continuous expression, and compare which edges and which triads remain statistically significant; if the reported PAX5–AICDA, PRDM1–PAX5, and PRDM1–PAX5–IRF4 signals do not survive any of these encodings, the network is an artifact of the two-state discretization rather than of the tensor-network machinery.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's claim, stated in the Discussion, is that the matrix-product-state plus quantum mutual information pipeline succeeds in recovering a gene regulatory network consisting of six pathway genes — IRF4, REL, PAX5, RELA, PRDM1, and AICDA — from single-cell RNA sequencing data of more than 28,000 lymphoblastoid cells. The recovered pairwise edges match known biology: PAX5 induces AICDA, PRDM1 represses PAX5, PRDM1 and PAX5 link to REL, and RELA–REL, PAX5–IRF4, PRDM1–IRF4, and PRDM1–AICDA appear as significant interactions at p < 0.1. The method also computes triadic quantum mutual information and finds the PRDM1–PAX5–IRF4 triad significant (p = 0.0110), which the authors read as a coordinated regulatory module in which IRF4 can act upstream of PRDM1 and PAX5. In the same analysis, the PRDM1–AICDA–IRF4 triad is not significant, which they interpret as evidence that IRF4's effect on AICDA is indirect, mediated through PRDM1 rather than direct.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that each gene's continuous expression is well captured by two biological states, active and inactive, and that the Gaussian-mixture cut used to binarize the data does not throw away the regulatory information being measured.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the claim holds, gene regulatory network inference can be done classically with tensor networks, avoiding the connectivity, noise, and barren-plateau problems that hamper variational quantum algorithm approaches.
  • The method produces higher-order interaction scores, so regulatory motifs such as synergy and redundancy can be examined directly rather than assembled from pairwise edges.
  • Because the pipeline is nonparametric and permutation-based, it can report significance for small gene sets and would give a principled way to add genes, subject to bond-dimension growth.
  • The recovered interactions in the NF-κB and plasma-cell differentiation circuit strengthen the case that known edges such as PAX5–AICDA and PRDM1–PAX5 are present in these data and that IRF4–AICDA is indirect.
  • The reported PRDM1–PAX5–IRF4 triad gives a concrete candidate module for follow-up experiments or for decomposition into unique, redundant, and synergistic information.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural extension the paper does not run is to replace the GMM binarization with continuous expression values or an alternative discretization; if the significant edges survive, the tensor-network mechanism is the carrier of the result, and if they do not, the binarization is doing the work.
  • The significant PRDM1–PAX5–IRF4 triad could be a signature of a simple chain, such as IRF4 activating PRDM1 and PRDM1 repressing PAX5, rather than irreducible three-way synergy; a partial information decomposition would settle which interpretation is right.
  • The separate left-tailed p-values suggest a tool for finding mutually exclusive or compensatory gene pairs genome-wide, since a significantly small QMI marks pairs that are more independent than chance would predict.
  • The Hilbert-curve ordering is presented as preserving biological locality, but an ablation study comparing random gene orderings would show how much of the inferred signal actually depends on that locality rather than on the mutual information computation itself.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a tensor-network (matrix product state, MPS) framework for inferring gene regulatory networks from single-cell RNA-seq data. The pipeline binarizes per-gene expression with two-component Gaussian mixture models, orders genes with a Hilbert curve after PCA, encodes the empirical distribution as a quantum state, builds an MPS, and computes quantum mutual information (QMI) between gene pairs and triples, with statistical significance assessed by permutation tests. The method is applied to six NF-κB pathway genes (IRF4, REL, PAX5, RELA, PRDM1, AICDA) in roughly 28,000 lymphoblastoid cells from GEO accessions GSE126321 and GSE158275. The authors report that the inferred pairwise edges and a PRDM1-PAX5-IRF4 triad are consistent with known biology, and argue that the MPS approach avoids the hardware and optimization difficulties of variational quantum algorithms.

Significance. If the statistical claims were sound, the contribution would be useful: it offers a classical, quantum-inspired method for higher-order dependency detection in gene expression, with polynomial MPS scaling and a permutation-testing framework, and it explicitly targets triadic regulatory interactions that pairwise methods miss. The paper is also honest in comparing against an existing quantum GRN method and in discussing scalability limits. However, the evidence for the central recovery claim currently rests on permutation p-values that are internally inconsistent, and the validation lacks benchmark comparisons and sensitivity analyses. The significance is therefore potential rather than demonstrated.

major comments (5)
  1. [Section III.E, Tables I and II] The reported permutation p-values are internally inconsistent in a way that affects the headline results. First, QMI is symmetric, so for a symmetric permutation null the p-value for (i,j) must equal the p-value for (j,i); yet Table I reports PRDM1-REL = 0.9900 and REL-PRDM1 = 0.9990, and Table II reports PRDM1-PAX5 = 0.0010 while PAX5-PRDM1 = 0.0001. These are not rounding artifacts. Second, with Nperm = 1000, Eqs. (2) and (3) give a minimum possible p-value of 1/(1001) ≈ 0.0010, so the value 0.0001 in Table II for PAX5-PRDM1 is impossible under the stated procedure. Because the same pipeline produces the triadic p = 0.011, the reader cannot verify any of the claimed significances from the paper alone. The authors should rerun the analysis, provide reproducible code and seeds, and correct the tables.
  2. [Section IV.2 and Figure 6] The statistical validation uses a threshold of p < 0.1 on fifteen pairwise tests with no multiple-testing correction. At this threshold one expects, under the null, roughly one to two spurious significant pairs among the fifteen comparisons, so the recovered-edge list is not convincing without correction or a stated family-wise error control procedure. The biological interpretation of left-tailed p-values as evidence of 'mechanisms enforcing independence' is also introduced only after the results are seen; the manuscript should specify a pre-registered or clearly justified testing protocol.
  3. [Section IV.3 and Eq. (4)] The triadic claim is not adequately supported. The paper reports that the PRDM1-PAX5-IRF4 triad has p = 0.0110, but this triple is apparently selected after inspecting the results among the 20 possible triples of six genes, and no multiple-testing correction is applied. Under the null, a p-value of about 0.011 is close to the expected minimum of 20 uniform p-values, so the finding could easily be a false positive. In addition, the permutation procedure described in Section III.E is defined only for gene pairs; the manuscript does not explain how the null distribution for the triadic QMI in Eq. (4) is generated, what statistic is permuted, or how the p-value is computed. This must be specified and corrected before the triadic conclusion can be assessed.
  4. [Section III.A and Section IV.1] The binarization step is load-bearing: all QMI values are computed from the two-component GMM assignment of each gene to active/inactive states. The BIC comparisons support K = 2 for these genes, but they do not establish that the inferred network is robust to the binarization choice. The authors should provide a sensitivity analysis varying the GMM threshold (e.g., using posterior-probability cutoffs other than the maximum), the number of components, the PCA dimensionality, the MPS bond dimension, and the Hilbert-curve ordering, and show that the significant edges and the triad survive these choices.
  5. [Section IV.2 and Discussion] There is no quantitative benchmark against standard GRN inference methods. The validation consists of matching known interactions from STRING and the literature, which is useful but does not demonstrate that the method outperforms or complements existing tools such as ARACNE, GENIE3, PIDC, or the quantum method of Ref. [24]. A comparison on a common benchmark (e.g., synthetic datasets with known ground truth or DREAM challenge data) with AUROC/AUPRC metrics would materially strengthen the central claim.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors, including 'rigth' in Section IV.2, 'succesful' in the Discussion, '28.000' for the cell count, and 'one-tailed-left and-rigth'. These should be corrected.
  2. [Section III.B] The text says PCA is applied to 'the gene expression matrix X or its binarized form Z' and it is not clear which input was used for the reported results. Please clarify.
  3. [Tables I and II] The tables report p-values to varying numbers of decimals and contain an apparent typo in Table II ('0.92131' for IRF4 in the REL row). Please standardize the precision and recheck all entries.
  4. [Figure 5] The QMI heatmap in Figure 5 would benefit from a colorbar and axis labels, and the text should state whether the displayed values are raw QMI or normalized in some way.
  5. [References] References [36] and [37] are the same paper; one should be removed or the two citations should be merged.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the GRN recovery is an external benchmark, not a fit to the target result.

full rationale

The paper's claimed derivation chain is: scRNA-seq data -> per-gene GMM binarization -> PCA/Hilbert ordering -> empirical state vector -> MPS -> QMI/triadic interaction information -> permutation p-values -> inferred network. At no step is a parameter fitted to the known regulatory edges or to the benchmark network; the recovered relationships are validated after the fact against STRING and published interactions. The QMI is computed directly from the binarized expression matrix, and the permutation null is generated from the same data, so the significance values are empirical summaries of input statistics rather than predictions derived from the claimed output. The only self-citation in the paper ([57], used for typical T1/T2 coherence times) is not load-bearing for the GRN inference. The GMM binarization, Hilbert ordering, and MPS truncation are modeling assumptions, not circular reductions. Concerns raised about the p<0.1 threshold, the internally inconsistent Table II value p=0.0001 with Nperm=1000, and the post-hoc interpretation of left-tailed p-values are statistical-correctness issues, not circularity: they do not make the inferred edges equivalent to the method's inputs by construction. No specific circular step can be exhibited from the paper's equations or citations.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on fitted binarization parameters, a PCA projection, an unreported MPS truncation, and post hoc thresholds. No new physical entities are introduced; the 'quantum state' is a purely mathematical encoding.

free parameters (6)
  • GMM parameters per gene = not reported
    For each of six genes, a two-component Gaussian mixture is fitted by EM (Section III.A) to binarize expression; these parameters determine active/inactive states.
  • Number of GMM components K = 2
    Selected by BIC comparison among K=1,2,3; this modeling choice sets the binary state space.
  • PCA top-2 components = not reported
    PCA is applied to the expression matrix for Hilbert curve ordering (Section III.B); fitted components affect gene order.
  • MPS bond dimension / truncation = not reported
    The paper mentions adaptive truncation but does not report the bond dimension or truncation error used for the six-gene MPS.
  • Significance threshold = 0.1
    Edges are called significant at p<0.1 (Section IV) with no multiple-testing correction.
  • Number of permutations = 1000
    Permutation test uses 1,000 iterations, limiting p-value resolution.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Each gene's expression is bimodal with one low and one high state.
    Section III.A assumes 'the expression follows a bimodal pattern' and fits a two-component GMM.
  • domain assumption Hilbert curve ordering preserves biological locality.
    Section III.B uses a Hilbert curve so nearby genes in 2D PCA space are adjacent in the 1D MPS chain; for an exact MPS this affects efficiency, not exact results.
  • standard math Von Neumann entropy equals Shannon entropy for diagonal density matrices.
    The state vector is a classical mixture over observed sequences, so reduced density matrices are diagonal; the paper does not state this reduction explicitly.
  • ad hoc to paper Left-tailed permutation p-values indicate biological independence mechanisms.
    Section III.E interprets significantly low QMI as mutual repression or compensatory regulation, an interpretation not independently validated.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Tensor Network based Gene Regulatory Network Inference for Single-Cell Transcriptomic Data." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KWKWSTUT

@misc{pith2026250906891,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Tensor Network based Gene Regulatory Network Inference for Single-Cell Transcriptomic Data},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KWKWSTUT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.06891}
}
abstract

Deciphering complex gene-gene interactions remains challenging in transcriptomics as traditional methods often miss higher-order and nonlinear dependencies. This study introduces a quantum-inspired framework leveraging tensor networks (TNs) to optimally map expression data into a lower dimensional representation preserving biological locality. Using Quantum Mutual Information (QMI), a nonparametric measure natural for tensor networks, we quantify gene dependencies and establish statistical significance via permutation testing. This constructs robust interaction networks where the edges reflect biologically meaningful relationships that are resilient to random chance. The approach effectively distinguishes true regulatory patterns from experimental noise and biological stochasticity. To test the proposed method, we recover a gene regulatory network consisted of six pathway genes from single-cell RNA sequencing data comprising over $28.000$ lymphoblastoid cells. Furthermore, we unveil several triadic regulatory mechanisms. By merging quantum physics inspired techniques with computational biology, our method provides novel insights into gene regulation, with applications in disease mechanisms and precision medicine.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.06891 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. First step of MPS decomposition via SVD. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Rank-N tensor visualized as a node with N legs in the tensor network formalism. Each ij for any j = 1, ..., N plays the role of the gene ‘gi’. To construct an MPS, we begin by reshaping the full wavefunction tensor ψi1i2...iN into a matrix that isolates the first subsystem: ψi1i2...iN → ψi1(i2...iN ) ∈ C d×d N−1 . Applying a Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) to this matrix yields: ψi1(i2...iN ) = Xr1 a1=1 Ui1a1 Sa1… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Final step: the full wavefunction as a product of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Schematic workflow of the Tensor Network based GRN inference method: (1) Gene [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison of gene regulatory networks (GRNs) in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [24]

    Benchmarking algorithms for gene regulatory network inference from single-cell transcriptomic data,

    A. Pratapa, A. Jalihal, and J. e. a. Law, “Benchmarking algorithms for gene regulatory network inference from single-cell transcriptomic data,”Nat Methods, vol. 17, pp. 147–154, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/ 10.1038/s41592-019-0690-6

    doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0690-6 2020

  2. [1]

    Marginal Probability Computation The marginal probability of a single subsystem in a MPS is obtained by tracing out all other subsystems. Given an MPS representation of a quantum state: |ψ⟩= X {ik} Ai1Ai2...A iN|i1i2...i N⟩,(A1) the reduced density matrix of thel-th site,ρ l, is com- puted as: ρl = Tr̸=l (|ψ⟩⟨ψ|).(A2) In the MPS formalism, this is achieve...

    work page

  3. [2]

    •Themiddle environmentM, which contains the tensorsA il1 andA il2 along with their indices

    Joint Probability Computation The joint probability of two subsystemsl 1 andl 2 is obtained by computing the reduced density matrixρl1l2, which traces out all other sites: ρl1l2 = Tr̸=l1,l2 (|ψ⟩⟨ψ|).(A6) This involves contracting three environments in the MPS representation: •Theleft environmentL, which accumulates con- tributions from sites beforel1. •Th...

    work page

  4. [3]

    All biology is computational biology,

    F. Markowetz, “All biology is computational biology,” PLoS biology, vol. 15, no. 3, p. e2002050, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2002050

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.2002050 2017

  5. [4]

    Systems biology in the context of big data and networks,

    M. Altaf-Ul-Amin, F. M. Afendi, S. K. Kiboi, and S. Kanaya, “Systems biology in the context of big data and networks,”BioMed research international, vol. 2014, no. 1, p. 428570, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/428570

    work page doi:10.1155/2014/428570 2014

  6. [5]

    The human genome project: lessons from large-scale biology,

    F. S. Collins, M. Morgan, and A. Patrinos, “The human genome project: lessons from large-scale biology,” Science, vol. 300, no. 5617, pp. 286–290, 2003. [Online]. Available: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3834139

    work page arXiv 2003

  7. [6]

    Next-generation dna sequencing meth- ods,

    E. R. Mardis, “Next-generation dna sequencing meth- ods,”Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 387–402, 2008. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1146/annurev.genom.9.081307.164359

    work page arXiv 2008

  8. [7]

    Profiling the hela s3 transcriptome using randomly primed cdna and massively parallel short-read sequencing,

    R. D. Morin, M. Bainbridge, A. Fejes, M. Hirst, M. Krzywinski, T. J. Pugh, H. McDonald, R. Varhol, S. J. Jones, and M. A. Marra, “Profiling the hela s3 transcriptome using randomly primed cdna and massively parallel short-read sequencing,”Biotechniques, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 81–94, 2008. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.2144/000112900

    work page doi:10.2144/000112900 2008

Show all 68 references
  1. [8]

    Rna-seq: a revolutionary tool for transcriptomics,

    Z. Wang, M. Gerstein, and M. Snyder, “Rna-seq: a revolutionary tool for transcriptomics,”Nature Reviews Genetics, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 57–63, 2009. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2484

    2009 doi

  2. [9]

    Using Bayesian networks to analyze expression data,

    N. Friedman, M. Linial, I. Nachman, and D. Pe’er, “Using Bayesian networks to analyze expression data,” inProceedings of the fourth annual international conference on Computational molecular biology, 2000, pp. 127–135. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10. 1145/332306.332355

  3. [10]

    Aracne: an algorithm for the reconstruction of gene regulatory networks in a mammalian cellular context,

    A. A. Margolin, I. Nemenman, K. Basso, C. Wiggins, G. Stolovitzky, R. D. Favera, and A. Califano, “Aracne: an algorithm for the reconstruction of gene regulatory networks in a mammalian cellular context,” inBMC bioinformatics, vol. 7. Springer, 2006, pp. 1–15. [Online]. Availa...

    2006 doi

  4. [11]

    Large-scale mapping and validation of escherichia coli transcriptional regulation from a compendium of expression profiles,

    J. J. Faith, B. Hayete, J. T. Thaden, I. Mogno, J. Wierzbowski, G. Cottarel, S. Kasif, J. J. Collins, and T. S. Gardner, “Large-scale mapping and validation of escherichia coli transcriptional regulation from a compendium of expression profiles,”PLoS biology, vol. 5, no. 1, p....

    2007 doi

  5. [12]

    Tigress: trustful inference of gene regulation using stability selection,

    A.-C. Haury, F. Mordelet, P. Vera-Licona, and J.-P. Vert, “Tigress: trustful inference of gene regulation using stability selection,”BMC systems biology, vol. 6, pp. 1–17, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1186/1752-0509-6-145

    2012 doi

  6. [13]

    A general framework for weighted gene co-expression network analysis,

    B. Zhang and S. Horvath, “A general framework for weighted gene co-expression network analysis,” Statistical applications in genetics and molecular biology, vol. 4, no. 1, 2005. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.2202/1544-6115.1128

    2005

  7. [14]

    Mutual information relevance networks: functional genomic clustering using pairwise entropy measurements,

    A. J. Butte and I. S. Kohane, “Mutual information relevance networks: functional genomic clustering using pairwise entropy measurements,” inBiocomputing 2000. World Scientific, 1999, pp. 418–429. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814447331_0040

    doi

  8. [16]

    Multiple linear regression for reconstruction of gene regulatory networks in solving cascade error problems,

    F. H. Salleh, Zainudin, S., and S. M. Arif, “Multiple linear regression for reconstruction of gene regulatory networks in solving cascade error problems,”Advances in bioinformatics, 2017. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1155/2017/4827171

    2017 doi

  9. [17]

    Inference of large-scale gene regulatory networks using regression-based network approach,

    H. Kim, Lee, J. K., and T. Park, “Inference of large-scale gene regulatory networks using regression-based network approach,”Journal of bioinformatics and computational biology, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 717–735, 2009. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1142/s0219720009004278

    2009 doi

  10. [18]

    An empirical bayes approach to inferring large-scale gene association networks,

    J. Schäfer and K. Strimmer, “An empirical bayes approach to inferring large-scale gene association networks,”Bioinformatics, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 754– 764, 2005. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1093/ bioinformatics/bti062

    2005

  11. [19]

    Relationships between probabilistic Boolean networks and dynamic Bayesian networks as models of gene regulatory networks,

    H. Lähdesmäki, S. Hautaniemi, I. Shmulevich, and O. Yli-Harja, “Relationships between probabilistic Boolean networks and dynamic Bayesian networks as models of gene regulatory networks,”Signal processing, vol. 86, no. 4, pp. 814–834, 2006. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/...

    2006 doi

  12. [20]

    Probabilistic Boolean networks: a rule-based uncer- tainty model for gene regulatory networks,

    I. Shmulevich, E. R. Dougherty, S. Kim, and W. Zhang., “Probabilistic Boolean networks: a rule-based uncer- tainty model for gene regulatory networks,”Bioinformat- ics, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 261–274, 2002. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/18.2.261

    2002 doi

  13. [21]

    Network inference and biological dynamics,

    C. J. Oates and S. Mukherjee, “Network inference and biological dynamics,”The annals of applied statistics, vol. 6, no. 3, p. 1209, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1214/11-AOAS532

    2012 doi

  14. [22]

    On reverse engineering of gene interaction networks using time course data with repeated measurements,

    E. R. Morrissey, M. A. Juárez, K. J. Denby, and N. J. Burroughs, “On reverse engineering of gene interaction networks using time course data with repeated measurements,”Bioinformatics, vol. 26, no. 18, pp. 2305–2312, 2010. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinform...

    2010 doi

  15. [23]

    Evaluating methods of inferring gene regulatory networks highlights their lack of performance for single cell gene expression data,

    S. Chen and J. C. Mar, “Evaluating methods of inferring gene regulatory networks highlights their lack of performance for single cell gene expression data,” BMC bioinformatics, vol. 19, pp. 1–21, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-018-2217-z

    2018 doi

  16. [25]

    Gaining confidence in inferred networks,

    L. P. M. Diaz and M. P. H. Stumpf, “Gaining confidence in inferred networks,”Scientific reports, vol. 12, no. 1, 2022. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-05402-9

    2022 doi

  17. [26]

    Quantum gene regulatory networks,

    C. Roman-Vicharra and J. J. Cai, “Quantum gene regulatory networks,”npj Quantum Information, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 67, 2023. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1038/s41534-023-00740-6

    2023 doi

  18. [27]

    Renormalization and 11 tensor product states in spin chains and lattices,

    J. I. Cirac and F. Verstraete, “Renormalization and 11 tensor product states in spin chains and lattices,” Journal of physics a: mathematical and theoretical, vol. 42, no. 50, p. 504004, 2009. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/42/50/504004

    2009 doi

  19. [28]

    The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states,

    U. Schollwöck, “The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states,”Annals of physics, vol. 326, no. 1, pp. 96–192, 2011. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2010.09.012

    2011 doi

  20. [29]

    Tensor networks for complex quantum systems,

    R. Orús, “Tensor networks for complex quantum systems,”Nature Reviews Physics, vol. 1, no. 9, pp. 538–550, 2019. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10. 1038/s42254-019-0086-7

    2019

  21. [30]

    Tensor networks enable the calculation of turbulence probability distributions,

    N. Gourianov, P. Givi, D. Jaksch, and S. B. Pope, “Tensor networks enable the calculation of turbulence probability distributions,”Science Advances, vol. 11, no. 5, p. eads5990, 2025. [Online]. Available: 10.1126/sciadv.ads5990

    2025 doi

  22. [31]

    Tensor networks in machine learning,

    R. Sengupta, S. Adhikary, I. Oseledets, and J. Biamonte, “Tensor networks in machine learning,”European Mathematical Society Magazine, no. 126, pp. 4–12,

  23. [32]

    Matrix product state representations,

    D. Perez-Garcia, F. Verstraete, M. M. Wolf, and J. I. Cirac, “Matrix product state representations,”arXiv preprint quant-ph/0608197, 2006

    2006 arXiv

  24. [33]

    Tensor networks meet neural networks: A survey and future perspectives,

    M. Wang, Y. Pan, Z. Xu, X. Yang, G. Li, and A. Cichocki, “Tensor networks meet neural networks: A survey and future perspectives,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.09019, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2302.09019

    2023 doi arXiv

  25. [34]

    Robust, synergistic regulation of human gene expression using tale activators,

    M. L. Maeder, S. J. Linder, D. Reyon, J. F. Angstman, Y. Fu, J. D. Sander, and J. K. Joung, “Robust, synergistic regulation of human gene expression using tale activators,”Nature methods, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 243–245, 2013. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2366

    2013 doi

  26. [35]

    Finite mixture models,

    G. J. McLachlan, S. X. Lee, and S. I. Rathnayake, “Finite mixture models,”Annual review of statistics and its application, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 355–378, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1002/0471721182

    2019 doi

  27. [36]

    Matrix product states and pro- jected entangled pair states: Concepts, sym- metries, theorems,

    J. I. Cirac, D. Perez-Garcia, N. Schuch, and F. Verstraete, “Matrix product states and pro- jected entangled pair states: Concepts, sym- metries, theorems,”Reviews of Modern Physics, vol. 93, no. 4, p. 045003, 2021. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.93.045003

    2021 doi

  28. [37]

    Density matrix renormalization group algorithms with a single center site,

    S. R. White, “Density matrix renormalization group algorithms with a single center site,”Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics, vol. 72, no. 18, p. 180403, 2005. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.72.180403

    2005 doi

  29. [38]

    Wisdom of crowds for robust gene network inference,

    D. Marbach, J. C. Costello, R. Küffner, N. M. Vega, R. J. Prill, D. M. Camacho, K. R. Allison, M. Kellis, J. J. Collinset al., “Wisdom of crowds for robust gene network inference,”Nature methods, vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 796–804, 2012

    2012

  30. [40]

    Hilbert curve vs hilbert space: exploiting fractal 2d covering to increase tensor network efficiency,

    G. Cataldi, A. Abedi, G. Magnifico, S. Notarnicola, N. Dalla Pozza, V. Giovannetti, and S. Montangero, “Hilbert curve vs hilbert space: exploiting fractal 2d covering to increase tensor network efficiency,” Quantum, vol. 5, p. 556, 2021. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/...

    2021 doi

  31. [41]

    Gene expression omnibus: NCBI gene expression and hybridization array data repository,

    R. Edgar, M. Domrachev, and A. E. Lash, “Gene expression omnibus: NCBI gene expression and hybridization array data repository,”Nucleic Acids Res, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 207–210, Jan. 2002. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/30.1.207

    2002 doi

  32. [42]

    A novel independence test for somatic alterations in cancer shows that biology drives mutual exclusivity but chance ex- plains most co-occurrence,

    S. Canisius, J. W. Martens, and L. F. Wessels, “A novel independence test for somatic alterations in cancer shows that biology drives mutual exclusivity but chance ex- plains most co-occurrence,”Genome biology, vol. 17, no. 1, p. 261, 2016

    2016

  33. [43]

    Mutual exclusivity analysis identifies oncogenic network modules,

    G. Ciriello, E. Cerami, C. Sander, and N. Schultz, “Mutual exclusivity analysis identifies oncogenic network modules,”Genome research, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 398–406, 2012

    2012

  34. [44]

    An incoherent regulatory network architecture that orchestrates b cell diversification in re- sponse to antigen signaling,

    R. Sciammas, Y. Li, A. Warmflash, Y. Song, A. R. Din- ner, and H. Singh, “An incoherent regulatory network architecture that orchestrates b cell diversification in re- sponse to antigen signaling,”Molecular systems biology, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 495, 2011

    2011

  35. [45]

    The Bayesian information criterion: background, derivation, and applications,

    A. A. Neath and J. E. Cavanaugh, “The Bayesian information criterion: background, derivation, and applications,”Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Compu- tational Statistics, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 199–203, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.199

    2012 doi

  36. [46]

    A regulatory cir- cuit controlling the dynamics of nfκb crel transitions b cellsfromproliferationtoplasmacelldifferentiation,

    K. Roy, S. Mitchell, Y. Liu, S. Ohta, Y.-s. Lin, M. O. Metzig, S. L. Nutt, and A. Hoffmann, “A regulatory cir- cuit controlling the dynamics of nfκb crel transitions b cellsfromproliferationtoplasmacelldifferentiation,”Im- munity, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 616–628, 2019

    2019

  37. [47]

    Prdm1/blimp1: a tumor suppressor gene in b and t cell lymphomas,

    M. Boi, E. Zucca, G. Inghirami, and F. Bertoni, “Prdm1/blimp1: a tumor suppressor gene in b and t cell lymphomas,”Leukemia & lymphoma, vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 1223–1228, 2015

    2015

  38. [48]

    Identification of a ubiquitously active pro- moter of the murine activation-induced cytidine deami- nase (aicda) gene,

    A. Yadav, A. Olaru, M. Saltis, A. Setren, J. Cerny, and F. Livák, “Identification of a ubiquitously active pro- moter of the murine activation-induced cytidine deami- nase (aicda) gene,”Molecular immunology, vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 529–541, 2006

    2006

  39. [49]

    The balance between pax5 and id2 activities is the key to aid gene expression,

    H. Gonda, M. Sugai, Y. Nambu, T. Katakai, Y. Agata, K. J. Mori, Y. Yokota, and A. Shimizu, “The balance between pax5 and id2 activities is the key to aid gene expression,”The Journal of experimental medicine, vol. 198, no. 9, p. 1427–1437, 2003. [Online]. Available: https://do...

    2003 doi

  40. [50]

    The anti-apoptotic activities ofrel and relarequired during b-cell maturation 12 involve the regulation of bcl-2 expression,

    M. Grossmann, L. A. O’Reilly, R. Gugasyan, A. Strasser, J. M. Adams, and S. Gerondakis, “The anti-apoptotic activities ofrel and relarequired during b-cell maturation 12 involve the regulation of bcl-2 expression,”The EMBO journal, 2000

    2000

  41. [51]

    Loss of pax5 promotes plasma cell differentiation,

    K.-P. Nera, P. Kohonen, E. Narvi, A. Peippo, L. Mustonen, P. Terho, K. Koskela, J.-M. Buerstedde, and O. Lassila, “Loss of pax5 promotes plasma cell differentiation,”Immunity, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 283–293,

  42. [52]

    The dynamic functions of irf4 in b cell malignancies,

    R. Maffei, S. Fiorcari, C. G. Atene, S. Martinelli, N. Mesini, F. Pilato, I. Lagreca, P. Barozzi, G. Riva, V. Nasilloet al., “The dynamic functions of irf4 in b cell malignancies,”Clinical and Experimental Medicine, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 1171–1180, 2023

    2023

  43. [53]

    Differential requirements for the canonical nf-κb transcription factors c-rel and rela during the generation and activation of mature b cells,

    M. Milanovic, N. Heise, N. S. De Silva, M. M. Anderson, K. Silva, A. Carette, F. Orelli, G. Bhagat, and U. Klein, “Differential requirements for the canonical nf-κb transcription factors c-rel and rela during the generation and activation of mature b cells,”Immunology and cell...

    2017 doi

  44. [54]

    Direct repression of prdm1 by bcl-6 inhibits plasmacytic differentiation,

    C. Tunyaplin, A. Shaffer, C. D. Angelin-Duclos, X. Yu, L. M. Staudt, and K. L. Calame, “Direct repression of prdm1 by bcl-6 inhibits plasmacytic differentiation,”The Journal of Immunology, vol. 173, no. 2, pp. 1158–1165, 2004

    2004

  45. [55]

    Pax5–a critical inhibitor of plasma cell fate,

    K.-P. Nera and O. Lassila, “Pax5–a critical inhibitor of plasma cell fate,”Scandinavian journal of immunology, vol. 64, no. 3, pp. 190–199, 2006

    2006

  46. [56]

    Error mitigation extends the computational reach of a noisy quantum processor,

    A. Kandala, K. Temme, A. D. Córcoles, A. Mezzacapo, J. M. Chow, and J. M. Gambetta, “Error mitigation extends the computational reach of a noisy quantum processor,”Nature, vol. 567, no. 7749, pp. 491– 495, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41586-019-1040-7

    2019

  47. [57]

    Graded expression of interferon regulatory factor-4 coordinates isotype switching with plasma cell differentiation,

    R. Sciammas, A. L. Shaffer, J. H. Schatz, H. Zhao, L. M. Staudt, and H. Singh, “Graded expression of interferon regulatory factor-4 coordinates isotype switching with plasma cell differentiation,”Immunity, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 225–236, 2006. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org...

    2006 doi

  48. [58]

    Quantum computing in the nisq era and be- yond,

    J. Preskill, “Quantum computing in the nisq era and be- yond,”Quantum, vol. 2, p. 79, 2018. [Online]. Available: Doi:https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2018-08-06-79

    2018 doi

  49. [59]

    The genetic network controlling plasma cell differentiation,

    S. L. Nutt, N. Taubenheim, J. Hasbold, L. M. Corco- ran, and P. D. Hodgkin, “The genetic network controlling plasma cell differentiation,” inSeminars in immunology, vol. 23, no. 5. Elsevier, 2011, pp. 341–349

    2011

  50. [60]

    Noise-adaptive compiler mappings for noisy intermediate-scale quantum computers,

    P. Murali, J. M. Baker, A. Javadi-Abhari, F. T. Chong, and M. Martonosi, “Noise-adaptive compiler mappings for noisy intermediate-scale quantum computers,” in Proceedings of the twenty-fourth international conference on architectural support for programming languages and opera...

    2019

  51. [61]

    Performance of surface codes in realistic quantum hardware,

    A. deMarti iOlius, J. Etxezarreta Martinez, P. Fuentes, P. M. Crespo, and J. Garcia-Frias, “Performance of surface codes in realistic quantum hardware,”Phys. Rev. A, vol. 106, p. 062428, Dec 2022. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.106.062428

    2022 doi

  52. [62]

    Barren plateaus in quantum neural network training landscapes,

    J. R. McClean, S. Boixo, V. N. Smelyanskiy, R. Babbush, and H. Neven, “Barren plateaus in quantum neural network training landscapes,”Nature communications, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 4812, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07090-4

    2018 doi

  53. [63]

    Noise-induced barren plateaus in variational quantum algorithms,

    S. Wang, E. Fontana, M. Cerezo, K. Sharma, A. Sone, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, “Noise-induced barren plateaus in variational quantum algorithms,”Nature communications, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 6961, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-27045-6

    2021 doi

  54. [64]

    Connecting ansatz expressibility to gradient magnitudes and barren plateaus,

    Z. Holmes, K. Sharma, M. Cerezo, and P. J. Coles, “Connecting ansatz expressibility to gradient magnitudes and barren plateaus,”PRX quantum, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 010313, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1103/PRXQuantum.3.010313

    2022 doi

  55. [65]

    Quantifying the effect of gate errors on variational quantum eigensolvers for quantum chemistry,

    K. Dalton, C. K. Long, Y. S. Yordanov, C. G. Smith, C. H. W. Barnes, N. Mertig, and D. R. M. Arvidsson-Shukur, “Quantifying the effect of gate errors on variational quantum eigensolvers for quantum chemistry,”npj Quantum Information, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 18, Jan 2024. [Online]. ...

    2024

  56. [66]

    Nonnegative decomposition of multivariate information,

    P. L. Williams and R. D. Beer, “Nonnegative decomposition of multivariate information,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1004.2515, 2010. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1004.2515

    2010 doi arXiv

  57. [67]

    Cost function dependent barren plateaus in shallow parametrized quantum circuits,

    M. Cerezo, A. Sone, T. Volkoff, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, “Cost function dependent barren plateaus in shallow parametrized quantum circuits,”Nature communications, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 1791, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-21728-w

    2021 doi

  58. [69]

    Encoding of matrix product states into quantum circuits of one- and two-qubit gates,

    S.-J. Ran, “Encoding of matrix product states into quantum circuits of one- and two-qubit gates,”Phys. Rev.A, vol. 101, p. 032310, Mar 2020. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.101.032310

    2020 doi

  59. [2006]

    Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j

    [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. immuni.2006.02.003

    2006 doi

  60. [2022]

    Available: https://doi.org/10.48550/ arXiv.2207.02851

    [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.48550/ arXiv.2207.02851

    doi arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.