cs.LGSep 5, 2026

PhenoBench: Mapping What a Deeply Phenotyped Human Cohort Can Tell Us

Authors: Gal SapirAlon DiamentAdva WolfDoron Yaya-StuppDikla Gelbard SolodkinDana AzouriAnat Etzion-FuchsGuy Lutsker+2 more

Abstract

Deeply phenotyped cohorts combine clinical, imaging, molecular, and wearable observations across timescales from seconds to years, but heterogeneous analyses are not directly comparable. We present PhenoBench, an executable benchmark that turns deep-phenotyping measurements into explicit questions and controlled comparisons of information sources and predictive models. It is built around the Human Phenotype Project, with more than 13,000 participants at the initial visit. Each question fixes the target, population, timing, and allowed information; its evaluation contract specifies the split, metric, baseline, and claim boundary. PhenoBench defines 90 clinically grounded tasks across 15 domains and 26 input modalities. Across 160 matched regression comparisons spanning 52 tasks, six pretrained tabular models ranked above the evaluated task-specific baselines, including XGBoost and CatBoost, under a fixed single-estimator protocol with bounded tuning. Giving each task equal weight, their mean advantage over ridge was 0.0103 R2R^2 (95% task-bootstrap interval, 0.0071-0.0136). We also evaluated 14 language models, collectively covering 40 tasks spanning phenotype recovery, classification, follow-up forecasting, and participant ordering. Without cohort-specific fitting, language models made informative predictions on some tasks but showed task-specific capability gaps, shared failures of scale, and rarely surpassed task-specific ridge or logistic regression models fitted on the same input fields. PhenoBench provides a versioned, auditable evaluation system where new questions, measurements, and models can be added without redefining existing comparisons.

Explore similar work

Jun 3, 2026cs.CL

GENEB: Why Genomic Models Are Hard to Compare

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.
Daria Ledneva, Mikhail Nuridinov, Denis Kuznetsov
Jul 28, 2026cs.LG

Neurai-VN Benchmark: Standardized Machine Learning Models for Multimodal Digital Phenotyping in Mental Health Classification

Digital phenotyping (DP) using smartphones and wearable devices has shown considerable potential for mental health monitoring. However, progress remains difficult to evaluate due to heterogeneous datasets, inconsistent preprocessing pipelines. In this work, we present a reproducible benchmark built upon the Neurai-VN dataset, a high-resolution, multimodal dataset comprising passive sensing and active assessment from wearable and smartphone devices, collected from 100 Vietnamese adults over two weeks. We define four binary classification tasks evaluated using standardized subject-wise cross-validation. Representative linear, tree-based, and neural baseline models are evaluated systematically across predefined feature-group configurations. Mean subject-level F1 scores across five cross-validation folds reached 0.71 for Healthy Control vs. Depression and Healthy Control vs. Clinical, while Healthy Control vs. Anxiety and Depression vs. Anxiety achieved 0.69 and 0.56, respectively. These baseline results provide reproducible baselines for future research on multimodal DP for mental health classification tasks.
Quoc-Cuong Pham, Hoang-Thuy-Duong Vu, Thi-Thanh-Huong Ha +1
Jul 27, 2026q-bio.QM

GraphRareBench: An Auditable Graph-Evidence Benchmark for Phenotype-Driven Rare-Disease Diagnosis

Phenotype-driven diagnostic benchmarks usually report the rank of the reference disease, but they rarely reveal which plausible alternatives are ranked above it or what evidence a tool-using model examines before making its decision. We introduce GraphRareBench, a provenance-preserving benchmark containing 2,365 ontology-derived cases and 18,093 target-confounder pairs. Each case includes a coarsened HPO query, a fixed candidate pool, graph-defined hard confounders, and source-linked evidence records. On the 237-case gene-component-disjoint test split, supervised rankers using a shared 21-feature interface achieved MRRs ranging from 0.640 to 0.740 and case-averaged target-over-confounder accuracies ranging from 0.898 to 0.916. Agents instantiated with Agents-A1 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash achieved MRRs of 0.746 and 0.718, respectively. Their paired MRR difference was not statistically significant, whereas their target-evidence coverage differed by 0.561. Together with the observation that 22.1% to 43.7% of selected Hit@10 successes still ranked at least one graph-defined hard confounder above the target, these results indicate that full-pool retrieval, hard-confounder discrimination, and observable evidence access capture complementary aspects of model behavior. GraphRareBench therefore provides a foundation for more transparent and evidence-aware evaluation of phenotype-driven diagnostic systems. Code and data are available at https://github.com/GUI0609/GraphRareBench.
Guiling Guo, Jia Yang, Jiahao Xu +3