Systems Biology seminars

Michelle M. Li examines how computational analyses can preserve the biological context of a proposed treatment, including cell type, disease state, genetic background and patient characteristics. She introduces Medea, an AI system that combines biological software, predictive models and literature retrieval while checking intermediate steps and reconciling evidence. The seminar presents evaluations involving cell-specific target selection, cancer-cell synthetic lethality and immunotherapy response. A separate yeast experiment tests predictions against previously unpublished measurements of gene-pair interactions under DNA-damaging treatments. The research addresses whether an agent can transfer useful evidence between contexts while recognizing when that transfer is unsupported. Reported comparisons cover predictive performance, computational failures and the ability to abstain. This recording retains the original seminar date.

Jiaqi Zhang examines how computational models can learn the effects of genetic interventions from single-cell experiments. Such experiments reveal causal relationships, but their high-dimensional measurements are costly to collect and difficult to interpret. The seminar connects identifiable causal representations with a predictive method for previously unseen perturbations. The approach incorporates prior biological knowledge and changes in data distributions to estimate responses at individual-cell resolution. It also uses predictions to guide subsequent experiments. An application identifies and experimentally validates previously unknown T-cell regulators with potential relevance to cancer immunotherapy. The recording follows the original July seminar; the series lists Zhang at MIT, while the recording biography describes her incoming Columbia appointment.

Learning entails self-modification of a system under closed-loop dynamics with its environment. Not only the system's components may change, but also the way they interact with one another - like synapses during learning in the brain, that modify interactions between neurons. Such processes, however, are not limited to the brain but can be found also in other areas of biology. I will describe a framework for a primitive form of learning that takes place within the single cell. This type of learning is composed of random modifications guided by global feedback. The capacity to utilize exploratory dynamics, improvisational in nature, provide cells with the plasticity required to overcome extreme challenges and to develop novel phenotypes.

Dictyostelium Discoideum (DD) are a fascinating single-cellular organism. When nutrients are plentiful, the DD cells act as autonomous individuals foraging their local vicinity. At the onset of starvation, a few (<0.1%) cells begin communicating with others by emitting a spike in the chemoattractant protein cyclic-AMP. Nearby cells sense the chemical gradient and respond by moving toward it and emitting a cyclic-AMP spike of their own. Cyclic-AMP activity increases over time, and eventually a spiral wave emerges, attracting hundreds of thousands of cells to an aggregation center. How DD cells go from autonomous individuals to a collective entity remains an open question for more than 60 years--a question whose answer would shed light on the emergence of multi-cellular life. Recently, trans-scale imaging has allowed the ability to sense the cyclic-AMP activity at both cell and colony levels. Using both the images as well as toy simulation models, this research aims to clarify whether the activity at the colony level is in fact initiated by a few cells, which may be deemed "leader" or "pacemaker" cells. In this talk, I will demonstrate the use of information-theoretic techniques to classify leaders and followers based on trajectory data, as well as to infer the domain of interaction of leader cells. We validate the techniques on toy models where leaders and followers are known, and then try to answer the question in real data--do leader cells drive collective behavior in DD colonies?

Ideas about optimization are at the core of how we approach biological complexity. Quantitative predictions about biological systems have been successfully derived from first principles in the context of efficient coding, metabolic and transport networks, evolution, reinforcement learning, and decision making, by postulating that a system has evolved to optimize some utility function under biophysical constraints. Yet as normative theories become increasingly high-dimensional and optimal solutions stop being unique, it gets progressively hard to judge whether theoretical predictions are consistent with, or "close to", data. I will illustrate these issues using efficient coding applied to simple neuronal models as well as to a complex and realistic biochemical reaction network. As a solution, we developed a statistical framework which smoothly interpolates between ab initio optimality predictions and Bayesian parameter inference from data, while also permitting statistically rigorous tests of optimality hypotheses.