Recent breakthroughs in foundation models and Large Language Models (LLMs) have introduced new opportunities for studying and decoding genomic sequences. Several state-of-the-art approaches, such as DNABERT2, rely on transformer-based architectures, while others, such as ConvNova, still build upon more conventional convolutional models. However, systematic benchmark comparisons across these methods remain scarce. Given that transformer-based models require extensive and costly pretraining, it is crucial to evaluate whether their performance gains justify this overhead. Moreover, LLMs such as DNABERT2 typically rely on Byte Pair Encoding (BPE) tokenization, whose relevance for DNA sequence representation is still debated within the genomics community. In this work, we investigate three key questions: (i) do transformer-based models provide sufficient improvements on fine-tuning tasks upon heavy pretraining, (ii) what is the actual contribution of pretraining in this setting, and (iii) how does BPE tokenization impact performance on genomics-related tasks?
DNA sequence encoding is fundamental to gene function prediction, protein synthesis, and diverse downstream biological tasks. Despite the substantial progress achieved by large-scale DNA sequence pretraining, existing studies have overwhelmingly emphasized pretraining scale and custom downstream evaluation datasets, while neglecting some essential components of the pretraining paradigm. In this paper, we reveal three critical yet heretofore overlooked problems in DNA pretraining: inappropriate downstream datasets, inherent flaws in the neighbor-masking strategy, and the lack of detailed discussion on vocabulary. Therefore, we undertake comprehensive investigations and propose principled guidelines, including selection criteria for evaluation datasets, guiding task design, and in-depth vocabulary analysis. Extensive experiments validate the significance of our identified problems and support the rationale behind our recommendations. Finally, we introduce a standardized testbed that enables reproducible and rigorous benchmarking of DNA pretraining methods to advance the development of genomic foundation models.
Genomic foundation models increasingly adopt large language model architectures, yet almost universally rely on fixed tokenization schemes such as k-mers, BPE, or single nucleotides, which impose arbitrary sequence boundaries that may obscure biologically relevant structure. We present LDARNet, a 120M-parameter hierarchical genomic foundation model that adapts H-Net-style dynamic chunking from autoregressive generation to masked language modeling, combining BiMamba-2 state-space layers with local attention, bidirectional routing, and a ratio-based regularizer to induce adaptive token boundaries without supervision. Fine-tuned on 27 tasks from the Nucleotide Transformer and Genomic Benchmarks suites, LDARNet achieves 11/18 wins among compact models (<300M parameters) and state-of-the-art results on 5 histone modification tasks, outperforming models up to 20× larger. A FLOPs-matched controlled experiment isolates learned routing as the source of these gains: learned boundaries beat fixed-grid boundaries by up to 14 percentage points on histone tasks at identical compute. Nucleotide-resolution analysis further shows that the learned boundaries align with canonical promoter motifs and splice junctions without supervision, providing a biological interpretation for adaptive tokenization in genomic foundation models.
Progress in genomic foundation models is difficult to assess due to fragmented benchmarks, incompatible evaluation protocols, and task-specific reporting. As a result, claims of superiority or generality across models are often not directly comparable. We introduce GENEB, a large-scale diagnostic benchmark that evaluates frozen representations from 40 genomic foundation models across 100 tasks spanning 13 functional categories under a unified probing-based protocol, including few-shot regimes. GENEB enables controlled comparison across model scale, architecture, tokenization, and pretraining data while explicitly exposing task-level trade-offs. Our analysis shows that aggregate leaderboards are unstable: model rankings vary sharply across task categories, scale provides only modest and inconsistent gains, and architectural and pretraining alignment frequently outweigh parameter count. These results highlight limitations of current evaluation practices and position GENEB as a reference framework for principled comparison and category-aware model selection in genomic machine learning.