Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Johanna Schrader

dblp:301/5913 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0001-9473-4635ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Bioinformatics and computational biology · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Bioinformatics and computational biology › single-cell analysis › cell type annotation
cell type classification
0.912025
A Systematic Evaluation of Single-Cell Foundation Models on Cell-Type Classification Task · WSDM 2025
Bioinformatics and computational biology
single-cell analysis
0.912025
A Systematic Evaluation of Single-Cell Foundation Models on Cell-Type Classification Task · WSDM 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

fine-tuning · 0.9few-shot learning · 0.9benchmarking · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 A Systematic Evaluation of Single-Cell Foundation Models on Cell-Type Classification Task
abstract
This study presents a comprehensive benchmarking of three state-of-the-art single-cell foundation models scGPT, Geneformer, and scFoundation, on cell-type classification tasks. We evaluate the models on three datasets: myeloid, human pancreas, and multiple sclerosis, examining both standard fine-tuning and few-shot learning scenarios. Our work reveals that scFoundation consistently achieves the best performance while Geneformer performs poorly, yielding results sometimes even worse than those of the baseline models. Additionally, we demonstrate that a good foundation model can generalize well even when fine-tuned with out-of-distribution data, a capability that the baseline models lack. Our work highlights the potential of foundation models for addressing challenging biomedical questions, particularly in contexts where models are trained on one population but deployed on another.
Nicolas Steiner, Omid Vosoughi, Johanna Schrader, Soumyadeep Roy, Wolfgang Nejdl, Ming Tang 0008
WSDM4