rewire.it
result · source checked

0.734 F1-Score

scGPT · F1-Score · M.S. single-cell dataset

Tested model
scGPT
Task or benchmark
Cell-type identification
Dataset
M.S. single-cell dataset
Procedure
Native scLLM cell-type identification as reported in Table 2.
Evaluation
scGPT: Cell-type identification
Evidence
Independent external evaluation · source checkedParameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning Enhances Adaptation of Single Cell Large Language Model for Cell Type Identification · Table 2, M.S. / scGPT row, F1-Score column

A source-checked result verifies the numerical transcription, not every model or protocol detail. Evaluation metadata: needs review. Source checked does not mean independently reproduced.

Evaluation results

Release 2026-09-16-d74d282221a9 · 1 evaluation · 1 metric row. Different protocols are not a single leaderboard.

Results grouped by the exact reported evaluation
Metric and findingCoverage and uncertaintyEvidence
scGPT: Cell-type identification

Native scLLM cell-type identification as reported in Table 2.

Independent external evaluation · Evaluation metadata: needs review

0.734 F1-Score

Unit: unitless · Direction: unknown

Uncertainty: not reported in legacy extract

Scored: Not reported · Eligible: Not reported

source checkedParameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning Enhances Adaptation of Single Cell Large Language Model for Cell Type Identification · Table 2, M.S. / scGPT row, F1-Score column

Source checking is not independent reproduction.

Sources and history

Release 2026-09-16-d74d282221a9 · Record review: source checked

Download this release
Technical metadata and extraction receipts

Stable ID: lit-025

areas
cells-tissues
tasks
Cell-type identification
printed value
0.734
numeric value
0.734
metric
F1-Score
metric direction
unknown
unit
unitless
uncertainty
Not reported
source locator
Table 2, M.S. / scGPT row, F1-Score column
review
method: independent_ai_table_review; reviewer: Codex omics research agent; independent source-table review, not human review; reviewed at: 2026-09-16T10:41:16.530269+00:00; notes: Selected M.S. dataset block, first scGPT/Geneformer occurrences. F1-Score is last column; later dataset blocks deliberately excluded. This verifies the central score at its source location, not every metadata field or an experimental reproduction.; evidence: {"table_xml_id": "T2", "row_cells": ["M.S.", "scGPT", "0.595", "0.777", "0.728", "0.734"], "selected_cell_zero_based": 5, "selected_cell_xml": "<td align=\"center\" valign=\"bottom\" rowspan=\"1\" colspan=\"1\">0.734</td>", "caption": "Performance of cell type identification using native scLLMs and popular tools.Bold value represents the highest score among the methods"}; artifact sha256: 77a4a859010259eadf2187465db6ab385efa4927a5eadb95c1e01991044c283f; retrieval url: https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/PMC10862733/fullTextXML
legacy id
lit-025
legacy row
id: lit-025; paper id: single-cell-peft-2024; domain id: cells-tissues; task: Cell-type identification; model: scGPT; model version: Not reported; dataset: M.S. single-cell dataset; dataset version: Not reported; split: Not reported; metric: F1-Score; value: 0.734; unit: unitless; uncertainty: Not reported; protocol: Native scLLM cell-type identification as reported in Table 2.; source locator: Table 2, M.S. / scGPT row, F1-Score column; source url: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10862733/; evaluation origin: independent_paper; reviewed utc: 2026-09-15T23:25:00Z
missing metadata
model version: not_reported_in_legacy_extract; dataset version: not_reported_in_legacy_extract; split: not_reported_in_legacy_extract; uncertainty: not_reported_in_legacy_extract
Related records

Suggest a correction