Review



sequencing visium spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning based gene expression prediction  (Spatial Transcriptomics Inc)

 
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
    • 86
      Buy from Supplier

    Structured Review

    Spatial Transcriptomics Inc sequencing visium spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning based gene expression prediction
    A. Acquisition of paired breast cancer spatial <t>transcriptomics</t> datasets and histology images from 10x <t>Visium</t> and Xenium. B. Co-registration of Visium and Xenium histology slides into a common coordinate system. The green box highlights the overlapping region retained between the two technologies. C. Rasterization of gene counts onto a uniform grid matched to Visium spot resolution, followed by extraction of the overlapping tissue region. Expression is visualized as patches. D. Training of deep learning models to predict per-patch gene expression from histology image patches. E. Performance evaluation on held-out replicates, comparison across technologies, and ablation experiments of inputs.
    Sequencing Visium Spatial Transcriptomics Technologies Impact Deep Learning Based Gene Expression Prediction, supplied by Spatial Transcriptomics Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/sequencing visium spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning based gene expression prediction/product/Spatial Transcriptomics Inc
    Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    sequencing visium spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning based gene expression prediction - by Bioz Stars, 2026-05
    86/100 stars

    Images

    1) Product Images from "Impact of Data Quality on Deep Learning Prediction of Spatial Transcriptomics from Histology Images"

    Article Title: Impact of Data Quality on Deep Learning Prediction of Spatial Transcriptomics from Histology Images

    Journal: bioRxiv

    doi: 10.1101/2025.09.04.674228

    A. Acquisition of paired breast cancer spatial transcriptomics datasets and histology images from 10x Visium and Xenium. B. Co-registration of Visium and Xenium histology slides into a common coordinate system. The green box highlights the overlapping region retained between the two technologies. C. Rasterization of gene counts onto a uniform grid matched to Visium spot resolution, followed by extraction of the overlapping tissue region. Expression is visualized as patches. D. Training of deep learning models to predict per-patch gene expression from histology image patches. E. Performance evaluation on held-out replicates, comparison across technologies, and ablation experiments of inputs.
    Figure Legend Snippet: A. Acquisition of paired breast cancer spatial transcriptomics datasets and histology images from 10x Visium and Xenium. B. Co-registration of Visium and Xenium histology slides into a common coordinate system. The green box highlights the overlapping region retained between the two technologies. C. Rasterization of gene counts onto a uniform grid matched to Visium spot resolution, followed by extraction of the overlapping tissue region. Expression is visualized as patches. D. Training of deep learning models to predict per-patch gene expression from histology image patches. E. Performance evaluation on held-out replicates, comparison across technologies, and ablation experiments of inputs.

    Techniques Used: Extraction, Expressing, Gene Expression, Comparison

    Histogram showing the distribution of Pearson correlation coefficients for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the held-out test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the Pearson correlation coefficients of predictions from Visium and Xenium data. The gray dotted line denotes x=y, and select genes corresponding to (C) labeled. C. Representative examples of ground truth and predicted gene expression for HDC , ANKRD30A , AHSP , and GZMK in both the Visium and Xenium datasets. Predicted gene expressions are visualized for the full dataset, while the performance metrics (PCC and normalized rMSE) are computed from the held-out test set only.
    Figure Legend Snippet: Histogram showing the distribution of Pearson correlation coefficients for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the held-out test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the Pearson correlation coefficients of predictions from Visium and Xenium data. The gray dotted line denotes x=y, and select genes corresponding to (C) labeled. C. Representative examples of ground truth and predicted gene expression for HDC , ANKRD30A , AHSP , and GZMK in both the Visium and Xenium datasets. Predicted gene expressions are visualized for the full dataset, while the performance metrics (PCC and normalized rMSE) are computed from the held-out test set only.

    Techniques Used: Gene Expression, Labeling

    A. Histogram showing the distribution of normalized rMSE for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean rMSE, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the normalized rMSE of predictions from Visium and Xenium data, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y.
    Figure Legend Snippet: A. Histogram showing the distribution of normalized rMSE for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean rMSE, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the normalized rMSE of predictions from Visium and Xenium data, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y.

    Techniques Used: Gene Expression

    A. Histogram of Pearson correlation coefficients for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data with the Visium image. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. B. Scatterplot comparing PCC values from Visium and Xenium data with the Visium image on the test set, averaged across five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. C. Histogram of PCC values for predictions using Visium and Xenium data with the Xenium image. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. D. Scatterplot comparing PCC values from Visium and Xenium data with the Xenium image on the test set, averaged across five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. E. Scatterplot comparing PCC values between Xenium, an increasing amount of sparsity in the Xenium dataset, and the Visium results on the test and replicate 2 Xenium data. The dotted line indicates the dataset used, and error bars represent the standard error across five runs. The histogram below denotes the total number of genes used to calculate the mean PCC. F. Scatterplot comparing PCC values between Xenium, an increasing amount of Poisson noise in the Xenium dataset, and the Visium results on the test and replicate 2 Xenium data. The dotted line indicates the dataset used, and error bars represent the standard error across five runs. G. Scatterplot comparing PCC values between Visium, various imputation methods on the Visium dataset, and the Xenium results on the test and replicate 2 Xenium data. The dotted line indicates the dataset used, and error bars represent the standard error across five runs.
    Figure Legend Snippet: A. Histogram of Pearson correlation coefficients for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data with the Visium image. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. B. Scatterplot comparing PCC values from Visium and Xenium data with the Visium image on the test set, averaged across five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. C. Histogram of PCC values for predictions using Visium and Xenium data with the Xenium image. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. D. Scatterplot comparing PCC values from Visium and Xenium data with the Xenium image on the test set, averaged across five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. E. Scatterplot comparing PCC values between Xenium, an increasing amount of sparsity in the Xenium dataset, and the Visium results on the test and replicate 2 Xenium data. The dotted line indicates the dataset used, and error bars represent the standard error across five runs. The histogram below denotes the total number of genes used to calculate the mean PCC. F. Scatterplot comparing PCC values between Xenium, an increasing amount of Poisson noise in the Xenium dataset, and the Visium results on the test and replicate 2 Xenium data. The dotted line indicates the dataset used, and error bars represent the standard error across five runs. G. Scatterplot comparing PCC values between Visium, various imputation methods on the Visium dataset, and the Xenium results on the test and replicate 2 Xenium data. The dotted line indicates the dataset used, and error bars represent the standard error across five runs.

    Techniques Used: Gene Expression

    Scatterplots of normalized rMSE for models trained on varied molecular inputs, evaluated on the held-out test set and averaged across five independent runs, using (A) the Visium histology image and (B) the Xenium histology image. The gray dotted line denotes x=y.
    Figure Legend Snippet: Scatterplots of normalized rMSE for models trained on varied molecular inputs, evaluated on the held-out test set and averaged across five independent runs, using (A) the Visium histology image and (B) the Xenium histology image. The gray dotted line denotes x=y.

    Techniques Used:

    Violin plots of the per-patch fraction of zero counts in Visium and Xenium molecular data. The shape of each violin reflects the density of values along the y-axis, and the overlaid boxplot indicates the median and the 25th and 75th percentiles.
    Figure Legend Snippet: Violin plots of the per-patch fraction of zero counts in Visium and Xenium molecular data. The shape of each violin reflects the density of values along the y-axis, and the overlaid boxplot indicates the median and the 25th and 75th percentiles.

    Techniques Used:

    A. Histogram showing the distribution of Pearson correlation coefficients for gene expression predictions using Visium data with the Visium and Xenium images. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the Pearson correlation coefficients of predictions from Visium data with the Visium and Xenium images, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. C. Histogram showing the distribution of Pearson correlation coefficients for gene expression predictions using the Xenium data with the Visium and Xenium image. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. D. Scatterplot comparing the Pearson correlation coefficients of predictions from Xenium data with the Visium and Xenium image, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. E. Scatterplot of mean Pearson correlation coefficients on both the test set and the Replicate 2 Xenium section, comparing the Xenium, Xenium images with increasing Gaussian blur, and Visium results (all applied with the same blur levels). The dotted line indicates the dataset used, and error bars represent the standard error of the mean across five independent model runs. F. Grad-CAM heatmaps for two select genes: CD4 (T-cell marker) and PDGFRA (fibroblast marker).
    Figure Legend Snippet: A. Histogram showing the distribution of Pearson correlation coefficients for gene expression predictions using Visium data with the Visium and Xenium images. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the Pearson correlation coefficients of predictions from Visium data with the Visium and Xenium images, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. C. Histogram showing the distribution of Pearson correlation coefficients for gene expression predictions using the Xenium data with the Visium and Xenium image. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. D. Scatterplot comparing the Pearson correlation coefficients of predictions from Xenium data with the Visium and Xenium image, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. E. Scatterplot of mean Pearson correlation coefficients on both the test set and the Replicate 2 Xenium section, comparing the Xenium, Xenium images with increasing Gaussian blur, and Visium results (all applied with the same blur levels). The dotted line indicates the dataset used, and error bars represent the standard error of the mean across five independent model runs. F. Grad-CAM heatmaps for two select genes: CD4 (T-cell marker) and PDGFRA (fibroblast marker).

    Techniques Used: Gene Expression, Marker

    Scatterplots of normalized RMSE for models trained on varied image inputs, evaluated on the held-out test set and averaged across five independent runs, using (A) the Visium molecular data and (B) the Xenium molecular data. The gray dotted line denotes x=y.
    Figure Legend Snippet: Scatterplots of normalized RMSE for models trained on varied image inputs, evaluated on the held-out test set and averaged across five independent runs, using (A) the Visium molecular data and (B) the Xenium molecular data. The gray dotted line denotes x=y.

    Techniques Used:

    A. Histogram showing the distribution of Pearson correlation for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean rMSE, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the Pearson correlation of predictions from Visium and Xenium data, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. C. Histogram showing the distribution of normalized rMSE for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean rMSE, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the normalized rMSE of predictions from Visium and Xenium data, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y.
    Figure Legend Snippet: A. Histogram showing the distribution of Pearson correlation for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean rMSE, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the Pearson correlation of predictions from Visium and Xenium data, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. C. Histogram showing the distribution of normalized rMSE for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean rMSE, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the normalized rMSE of predictions from Visium and Xenium data, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y.

    Techniques Used: Gene Expression



    Similar Products

    sequencing visium spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning based gene expression prediction  (Spatial Transcriptomics Inc)
    86
    Spatial Transcriptomics Inc sequencing visium spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning based gene expression prediction
    A. Acquisition of paired breast cancer spatial <t>transcriptomics</t> datasets and histology images from 10x <t>Visium</t> and Xenium. B. Co-registration of Visium and Xenium histology slides into a common coordinate system. The green box highlights the overlapping region retained between the two technologies. C. Rasterization of gene counts onto a uniform grid matched to Visium spot resolution, followed by extraction of the overlapping tissue region. Expression is visualized as patches. D. Training of deep learning models to predict per-patch gene expression from histology image patches. E. Performance evaluation on held-out replicates, comparison across technologies, and ablation experiments of inputs.
    Sequencing Visium Spatial Transcriptomics Technologies Impact Deep Learning Based Gene Expression Prediction, supplied by Spatial Transcriptomics Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/sequencing visium spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning based gene expression prediction/product/Spatial Transcriptomics Inc
    Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    sequencing visium spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning based gene expression prediction - by Bioz Stars, 2026-05
    86/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results


    A. Acquisition of paired breast cancer spatial transcriptomics datasets and histology images from 10x Visium and Xenium. B. Co-registration of Visium and Xenium histology slides into a common coordinate system. The green box highlights the overlapping region retained between the two technologies. C. Rasterization of gene counts onto a uniform grid matched to Visium spot resolution, followed by extraction of the overlapping tissue region. Expression is visualized as patches. D. Training of deep learning models to predict per-patch gene expression from histology image patches. E. Performance evaluation on held-out replicates, comparison across technologies, and ablation experiments of inputs.

    Journal: bioRxiv

    Article Title: Impact of Data Quality on Deep Learning Prediction of Spatial Transcriptomics from Histology Images

    doi: 10.1101/2025.09.04.674228

    Figure Lengend Snippet: A. Acquisition of paired breast cancer spatial transcriptomics datasets and histology images from 10x Visium and Xenium. B. Co-registration of Visium and Xenium histology slides into a common coordinate system. The green box highlights the overlapping region retained between the two technologies. C. Rasterization of gene counts onto a uniform grid matched to Visium spot resolution, followed by extraction of the overlapping tissue region. Expression is visualized as patches. D. Training of deep learning models to predict per-patch gene expression from histology image patches. E. Performance evaluation on held-out replicates, comparison across technologies, and ablation experiments of inputs.

    Article Snippet: Here, we investigate how variation in molecular and image data quality stemming from differences in imaging (Xenium) versus sequencing (Visium) spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning-based gene expression prediction from histology images.

    Techniques: Extraction, Expressing, Gene Expression, Comparison

    Histogram showing the distribution of Pearson correlation coefficients for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the held-out test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the Pearson correlation coefficients of predictions from Visium and Xenium data. The gray dotted line denotes x=y, and select genes corresponding to (C) labeled. C. Representative examples of ground truth and predicted gene expression for HDC , ANKRD30A , AHSP , and GZMK in both the Visium and Xenium datasets. Predicted gene expressions are visualized for the full dataset, while the performance metrics (PCC and normalized rMSE) are computed from the held-out test set only.

    Journal: bioRxiv

    Article Title: Impact of Data Quality on Deep Learning Prediction of Spatial Transcriptomics from Histology Images

    doi: 10.1101/2025.09.04.674228

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Histogram showing the distribution of Pearson correlation coefficients for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the held-out test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the Pearson correlation coefficients of predictions from Visium and Xenium data. The gray dotted line denotes x=y, and select genes corresponding to (C) labeled. C. Representative examples of ground truth and predicted gene expression for HDC , ANKRD30A , AHSP , and GZMK in both the Visium and Xenium datasets. Predicted gene expressions are visualized for the full dataset, while the performance metrics (PCC and normalized rMSE) are computed from the held-out test set only.

    Article Snippet: Here, we investigate how variation in molecular and image data quality stemming from differences in imaging (Xenium) versus sequencing (Visium) spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning-based gene expression prediction from histology images.

    Techniques: Gene Expression, Labeling

    A. Histogram showing the distribution of normalized rMSE for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean rMSE, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the normalized rMSE of predictions from Visium and Xenium data, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y.

    Journal: bioRxiv

    Article Title: Impact of Data Quality on Deep Learning Prediction of Spatial Transcriptomics from Histology Images

    doi: 10.1101/2025.09.04.674228

    Figure Lengend Snippet: A. Histogram showing the distribution of normalized rMSE for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean rMSE, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the normalized rMSE of predictions from Visium and Xenium data, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y.

    Article Snippet: Here, we investigate how variation in molecular and image data quality stemming from differences in imaging (Xenium) versus sequencing (Visium) spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning-based gene expression prediction from histology images.

    Techniques: Gene Expression

    A. Histogram of Pearson correlation coefficients for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data with the Visium image. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. B. Scatterplot comparing PCC values from Visium and Xenium data with the Visium image on the test set, averaged across five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. C. Histogram of PCC values for predictions using Visium and Xenium data with the Xenium image. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. D. Scatterplot comparing PCC values from Visium and Xenium data with the Xenium image on the test set, averaged across five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. E. Scatterplot comparing PCC values between Xenium, an increasing amount of sparsity in the Xenium dataset, and the Visium results on the test and replicate 2 Xenium data. The dotted line indicates the dataset used, and error bars represent the standard error across five runs. The histogram below denotes the total number of genes used to calculate the mean PCC. F. Scatterplot comparing PCC values between Xenium, an increasing amount of Poisson noise in the Xenium dataset, and the Visium results on the test and replicate 2 Xenium data. The dotted line indicates the dataset used, and error bars represent the standard error across five runs. G. Scatterplot comparing PCC values between Visium, various imputation methods on the Visium dataset, and the Xenium results on the test and replicate 2 Xenium data. The dotted line indicates the dataset used, and error bars represent the standard error across five runs.

    Journal: bioRxiv

    Article Title: Impact of Data Quality on Deep Learning Prediction of Spatial Transcriptomics from Histology Images

    doi: 10.1101/2025.09.04.674228

    Figure Lengend Snippet: A. Histogram of Pearson correlation coefficients for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data with the Visium image. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. B. Scatterplot comparing PCC values from Visium and Xenium data with the Visium image on the test set, averaged across five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. C. Histogram of PCC values for predictions using Visium and Xenium data with the Xenium image. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. D. Scatterplot comparing PCC values from Visium and Xenium data with the Xenium image on the test set, averaged across five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. E. Scatterplot comparing PCC values between Xenium, an increasing amount of sparsity in the Xenium dataset, and the Visium results on the test and replicate 2 Xenium data. The dotted line indicates the dataset used, and error bars represent the standard error across five runs. The histogram below denotes the total number of genes used to calculate the mean PCC. F. Scatterplot comparing PCC values between Xenium, an increasing amount of Poisson noise in the Xenium dataset, and the Visium results on the test and replicate 2 Xenium data. The dotted line indicates the dataset used, and error bars represent the standard error across five runs. G. Scatterplot comparing PCC values between Visium, various imputation methods on the Visium dataset, and the Xenium results on the test and replicate 2 Xenium data. The dotted line indicates the dataset used, and error bars represent the standard error across five runs.

    Article Snippet: Here, we investigate how variation in molecular and image data quality stemming from differences in imaging (Xenium) versus sequencing (Visium) spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning-based gene expression prediction from histology images.

    Techniques: Gene Expression

    Scatterplots of normalized rMSE for models trained on varied molecular inputs, evaluated on the held-out test set and averaged across five independent runs, using (A) the Visium histology image and (B) the Xenium histology image. The gray dotted line denotes x=y.

    Journal: bioRxiv

    Article Title: Impact of Data Quality on Deep Learning Prediction of Spatial Transcriptomics from Histology Images

    doi: 10.1101/2025.09.04.674228

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Scatterplots of normalized rMSE for models trained on varied molecular inputs, evaluated on the held-out test set and averaged across five independent runs, using (A) the Visium histology image and (B) the Xenium histology image. The gray dotted line denotes x=y.

    Article Snippet: Here, we investigate how variation in molecular and image data quality stemming from differences in imaging (Xenium) versus sequencing (Visium) spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning-based gene expression prediction from histology images.

    Techniques:

    Violin plots of the per-patch fraction of zero counts in Visium and Xenium molecular data. The shape of each violin reflects the density of values along the y-axis, and the overlaid boxplot indicates the median and the 25th and 75th percentiles.

    Journal: bioRxiv

    Article Title: Impact of Data Quality on Deep Learning Prediction of Spatial Transcriptomics from Histology Images

    doi: 10.1101/2025.09.04.674228

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Violin plots of the per-patch fraction of zero counts in Visium and Xenium molecular data. The shape of each violin reflects the density of values along the y-axis, and the overlaid boxplot indicates the median and the 25th and 75th percentiles.

    Article Snippet: Here, we investigate how variation in molecular and image data quality stemming from differences in imaging (Xenium) versus sequencing (Visium) spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning-based gene expression prediction from histology images.

    Techniques:

    A. Histogram showing the distribution of Pearson correlation coefficients for gene expression predictions using Visium data with the Visium and Xenium images. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the Pearson correlation coefficients of predictions from Visium data with the Visium and Xenium images, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. C. Histogram showing the distribution of Pearson correlation coefficients for gene expression predictions using the Xenium data with the Visium and Xenium image. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. D. Scatterplot comparing the Pearson correlation coefficients of predictions from Xenium data with the Visium and Xenium image, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. E. Scatterplot of mean Pearson correlation coefficients on both the test set and the Replicate 2 Xenium section, comparing the Xenium, Xenium images with increasing Gaussian blur, and Visium results (all applied with the same blur levels). The dotted line indicates the dataset used, and error bars represent the standard error of the mean across five independent model runs. F. Grad-CAM heatmaps for two select genes: CD4 (T-cell marker) and PDGFRA (fibroblast marker).

    Journal: bioRxiv

    Article Title: Impact of Data Quality on Deep Learning Prediction of Spatial Transcriptomics from Histology Images

    doi: 10.1101/2025.09.04.674228

    Figure Lengend Snippet: A. Histogram showing the distribution of Pearson correlation coefficients for gene expression predictions using Visium data with the Visium and Xenium images. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the Pearson correlation coefficients of predictions from Visium data with the Visium and Xenium images, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. C. Histogram showing the distribution of Pearson correlation coefficients for gene expression predictions using the Xenium data with the Visium and Xenium image. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean PCC, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. D. Scatterplot comparing the Pearson correlation coefficients of predictions from Xenium data with the Visium and Xenium image, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. E. Scatterplot of mean Pearson correlation coefficients on both the test set and the Replicate 2 Xenium section, comparing the Xenium, Xenium images with increasing Gaussian blur, and Visium results (all applied with the same blur levels). The dotted line indicates the dataset used, and error bars represent the standard error of the mean across five independent model runs. F. Grad-CAM heatmaps for two select genes: CD4 (T-cell marker) and PDGFRA (fibroblast marker).

    Article Snippet: Here, we investigate how variation in molecular and image data quality stemming from differences in imaging (Xenium) versus sequencing (Visium) spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning-based gene expression prediction from histology images.

    Techniques: Gene Expression, Marker

    Scatterplots of normalized RMSE for models trained on varied image inputs, evaluated on the held-out test set and averaged across five independent runs, using (A) the Visium molecular data and (B) the Xenium molecular data. The gray dotted line denotes x=y.

    Journal: bioRxiv

    Article Title: Impact of Data Quality on Deep Learning Prediction of Spatial Transcriptomics from Histology Images

    doi: 10.1101/2025.09.04.674228

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Scatterplots of normalized RMSE for models trained on varied image inputs, evaluated on the held-out test set and averaged across five independent runs, using (A) the Visium molecular data and (B) the Xenium molecular data. The gray dotted line denotes x=y.

    Article Snippet: Here, we investigate how variation in molecular and image data quality stemming from differences in imaging (Xenium) versus sequencing (Visium) spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning-based gene expression prediction from histology images.

    Techniques:

    A. Histogram showing the distribution of Pearson correlation for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean rMSE, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the Pearson correlation of predictions from Visium and Xenium data, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. C. Histogram showing the distribution of normalized rMSE for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean rMSE, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the normalized rMSE of predictions from Visium and Xenium data, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y.

    Journal: bioRxiv

    Article Title: Impact of Data Quality on Deep Learning Prediction of Spatial Transcriptomics from Histology Images

    doi: 10.1101/2025.09.04.674228

    Figure Lengend Snippet: A. Histogram showing the distribution of Pearson correlation for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean rMSE, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the Pearson correlation of predictions from Visium and Xenium data, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y. C. Histogram showing the distribution of normalized rMSE for gene expression predictions using Visium and Xenium data. The dotted vertical line denotes the mean rMSE, and the solid curved line traces the density estimate. Results are computed on the test set and represent the average performance across five independently trained models. B. Scatterplot comparing the normalized rMSE of predictions from Visium and Xenium data, based on the test set and averaged over five models. The gray dotted line denotes x=y.

    Article Snippet: Here, we investigate how variation in molecular and image data quality stemming from differences in imaging (Xenium) versus sequencing (Visium) spatial transcriptomics technologies impact deep learning-based gene expression prediction from histology images.

    Techniques: Gene Expression