Hacktoberfest 2026：維護者為十月標記出來的 issue，仍然開放、適合新手。 瀏覽 Hacktoberfest issue

Question: Simulating gene knockout on novel datasets (zero-shot inference) & Implementation feedback

未關閉
  • 哪裡不對？
#5 1 則留言 1 個 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 檢視

還沒有人認領這個 Issue。

評估

難度
5/5
預估耗時
一週以上
新手友好度
30/100
Issue 類型
功能
描述清晰度
需要釐清
活躍度
活躍
技術堆疊
python
領域
machine-learning

研究方向

先追蹤 dataset_core.py、sampler.py 和 diffusion_core.py 中與推論相關的假設，接著檢查 checkpoint 載入以及所參照的 embedder 對映。使用 finetuned_tahoe100m_fixed.ckpt 和新的 .h5ad 資料集重現回報的失敗。完成的要求是由維護者決定是否支援 zero-shot；如果支援，則需要定義推論進入點或 predict.py 工作流程。

由索引模型根據 Issue 內容生成。

描述

Dear Authors,

First of all, thank you for your outstanding work on PerturbDiff! The concept and the methodology are truly inspiring.

I am currently trying to apply your pre-trained model (specifically the finetuned_tahoe100m_fixed.ckpt) to a novel, independent single-cell dataset (Colorectal Cancer data). My goal is to perform pure inference: simulating the knockout of a specific gene (e.g., TP53) on this unseen dataset, without having any actual ground-truth perturbation data or paired control cells.

My primary question is: Does the current theoretical framework and the pre-trained checkpoint support this kind of "zero-shot" simulation on a completely novel dataset?

While attempting to implement this inference pipeline, I ran into several engineering challenges. It seems that the current codebase is heavily optimized for training and reproducing benchmark metrics, which makes it quite difficult to decouple for pure, out-of-distribution inference. I would love to share a brief summary of the roadblocks I encountered, in hopes it might be helpful for future updates or an inference-only API:

Tight Coupling in DataLoader & Sampler: The dataset_core.py and sampler.py strictly expect paired "control" and "perturbed" cells to calculate metrics. Bypassing this to feed a simple .h5ad file of raw cells requires heavily modifying the dictionary mappings (e.g., grouped_num_cell, data_indices) to prevent KeyErrors and AssertionErrors.

Hardcoded Dataset Names & Metadata: The codebase heavily relies on predefined dataset names (pbmc, tahoe100m, etc.). When feeding novel data, the framework automatically assigns names like dummy_plate_9, which later causes AssertionErrors in functions like get_short_dsname and embedder mapping.

Strict Checkpoint Loading & Embedder Dimensions: When adapting the model to accept my dataset's dimensions (e.g., 2000 HVGs), modifying the nn.Linear layers causes Unexpected key(s) in load_state_dict because the checkpoint contains hardcoded dataset-specific embedders (e.g., x_embedder.pbmc.weight). This required setting strict=False to force initialization.

Shape Assertions in Diffusion Core: During the forward pass, the Transformer blocks often output a 3D tensor [Batch, 1, Dim], but the diffusion_core.py strictly asserts x_t.shape == eps.shape (expecting [Batch, Dim]). This required manual squeeze/reshape operations at the model's output to prevent runtime crashes.

I wanted to ask if you have any plans to release a simplified predict.py script for users who just want to input an .h5ad and a perturbation condition to get the simulated results.

Thank you again for your time, your amazing research, and for making this repository open-source!

主要語言
Python
星號
64
分支
10
30 天內沒有已合併 PR

環境準備

這個專案沒有提供開發容器、Dockerfile 或貢獻指南，環境需要你自己搭建：先看它的 README，通用步驟見我們的新手貢獻指南。

從這裡開始

  1. 先讀完整個 Issue，再讀專案的貢獻指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言說明你要接手 —— 這能避免兩個人做同樣的事。
  3. Fork 儲存庫，在一個分支上完成修改。
  4. 送出 Pull Request，並在描述裡引用這個 Issue 編號。

DeepGraphLearning/PerturbDiff 的其他 Issue

查看 DeepGraphLearning/PerturbDiff 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 Python Issue

把新 issue 寄到你的電子郵件信箱

精選適合新手參與的 GitHub issue 摘要。