SeqMaestro: From nucleotide sequences to biological hypotheses through interpretable machine learning
Authors: Evgeny S. Saveliev, Krzysztof Kacprzyk, Charlotte Capitanchik, Neelanjan Mukherjee, Kate Matlin, Ryan Sheridan, Srinivas Ramachandran, Jernej Ule, +2 more
Nucleotide sequence analysis is central to problems spanning regulatory genomics, evolutionary biology, and phenotype prediction. Classical bioinformatics methods extract interpretable sequence properties such as motifs and k-mer composition, but their flexibility is limited. In contrast, modern deep learning models can learn powerful predictive representations directly from raw sequences, yet their internal representations and decision mechanisms are difficult to inspect. Interpretable machine learning methods (e.g., sparse linear models and decision trees) provide human-understandable representations of predictive relationships but are not designed to operate directly on nucleotide sequences. Here, we introduce SeqMaestro, a machine learning framework that proposes biological hypotheses from nucleotide sequences using interpretable models. Our solution is centered around a two-layer interface that connects nucleotide sequences with the broader ecosystem of interpretable machine learning. SeqMaestro uses this interface to fit diverse combinations of interpretable models, feature representations, and extraction strategies, leveraging variability across transparent models to identify robust biological signals and richer predictive relationships than feature importance alone can provide. The system also supports data transformation and cleaning, model fitting, hyperparameter tuning, reliability analysis, and synthesis of results into a contextualized written report. By providing these capabilities through a no-code workflow, SeqMaestro is designed to make interpretable sequence analysis accessible to researchers without requiring extensive programming or machine learning expertise. SeqMaestro thereby provides an accessible route from nucleotide sequences to biological hypotheses.
Deep neural networks have achieved strong performance in genomic sequence classification; however, relating their predictions to biologically meaningful sequence patterns remains challenging. In this work, we present AttnGen, an attention-guided training framework that embeds interpretability directly into the optimization process. AttnGen computes nucleotide-level importance scores using an attention mechanism and progressively suppresses low-contribution positions during training. This encourages the model to focus its predictions on a compact set of informative regions while reducing reliance on noisy sequence elements. We evaluate AttnGen on the standardized demo_human_or_worm benchmark, a binary classification task over 200-nucleotide sequences. With moderate masking, AttnGen achieves a validation accuracy of 96.73%, outperforming a conventional CNN baseline with 95.83% accuracy, while also exhibiting faster convergence and improved training stability. To assess whether the learned importance scores reflect functionally relevant signal, we conduct perturbation-based analysis by removing high-saliency nucleotides. This causes accuracy to drop from 96.9% to near chance level on a 3,000-sequence evaluation set, indicating that the model relies on a relatively small subset of informative positions. Our analysis shows that masking 10--20% of positions provides the most favorable trade-off between predictive performance and interpretability. These results suggest that attention-guided masking not only improves classification performance but also reshapes how models distribute importance across sequence positions. Although this study focuses on short genomic sequences, the proposed approach may extend to more complex interpretable sequence modeling settings.
DNA cis-regulatory elements (CREs) such as enhancers control gene expression levels. Accurately predicting regulatory activity from DNA sequences is valuable but challenging, as it requires understanding complex biological regulatory processes. Existing methods typically regress activity scores from sequences in a black-box manner, limiting both interpretability and regression performance. Meanwhile, large language models (LLMs) benefit from explicit reasoning processes, yet directly applying LLMs to raw DNA sequences performs poorly. In this paper, we bridge this gap by introducing R3LM, a framework that teaches LLMs reasoning-informed regression on regulatory DNA through structured biological knowledge. Specifically, we design a biologically grounded data format that structures DNA's regulatory information for improved LLM understanding, and construct CRE-ReasonBench, the first dataset that associates DNA sequences and activity scores with mechanistic reasoning traces. Through two-stage training that first teaches LLMs reasoning over structured biological information then performs regression, R3LM achieves state-of-the-art performance on enhancer prediction across three cell types, outperforming both LLMs with raw sequence input and specialized DNA models while providing interpretable mechanistic explanations. We expect R3LM as an interpretable reward model that can effectively assist biologists in CRE design. Code is available at https://github.com/DuanYi516/R3LM.
Advances in machine learning and computational power have unlocked the predictive potential of the human genome, yet biologists now demand that these models also elucidate the underlying biological mechanisms. While interpretable machine learning (IML) techniques have been increasingly applied to bridge this gap, there has been a pervasive reliance on anecdotal validation: the vast majority of research relies on a single IML method and reports only isolated successful instances. Through a benchmarking study on transcription factor binding, we demonstrate the risks of current practices. We show that different IML methods can often (1) yield contradictory explanations for the same predictions, (2) fail to localize known regulatory motifs, and (3) fail to faithfully reflect the model's internal decision process. In light of this, we argue for a validation framework analogous to clinical trials: just as trials require rigorous design and adverse-event reporting, genomic interpretability must move beyond cherry-picked plausibility toward systematic assessment of consistency, faithfulness, and biological validity. To facilitate this, we propose a tiered framework to guide rigorous evaluation and reporting of genomic IML methods.