Bo Wang & Ci Chu on why virtual cells need causal data, not atlases
Xaira's virtual-cell leads on why the bottleneck to predicting biology isn't the model but the data — and how industrializing CRISPR perturbation screens into causal datasets let a diffusion model predict how cells respond to genes it has never seen.
AI Models Begin With the Data
<strong>The bottleneck to predicting biology isn't the model, it's the data</strong> — protein design took off because 70 years of curated structures existed, while virtual cells lagged for want of that same scale of high-quality causal data.
we don't have the right biological data really to power the training of a predictive model.
Correlation Can't Reveal Cause
<strong>Observational data is underpowered to learn causality</strong> — when genes rise and fall together, countless wiring diagrams explain the same pattern, and only intervening on a gene reveals which one is actually in charge.
Fundamentally, we believe observational data are underpowered to learn causality truly.
Manufacturing Causality at Scale
<strong>Perturb-seq pools thousands of single-gene interventions into scalable causal screens</strong> — CRISPR silences one gene per cell, a guide-RNA barcode records the target, and single-cell RNA-seq reads all ~20,000 genes; the released dataset spans 25 million quality-filtered cells across seven genome-wide campaigns.
you can easily detect stress signals from the cells and from your scientists in the lab.
Editing Cells, Not Typing Them
<strong>Gene expression isn't a sentence, so X-Cell doesn't write it left-to-right</strong> — instead of autoregression's forced word order, a diffusion model starts from a rough guess of the whole cell and iteratively refines it, editing rather than typing.
So you kind of iteratively edit the gene expression predictions until it minimize the losses.
Predicting a Cell It Has Never Seen
<strong>The whole point of a model is to answer questions you never ran the experiment for</strong> — trained only on resting T-cells, X-Cell predicted activated-T-cell perturbations better than the linear baseline, and a version trained on a single T-cell line still predicted accurately in primary cells from multiple donors.
we told the model hey this is how the active T-cell look like now go and predict what all of the perturbation are going to do in this active T-cell.
Data Beats Architecture Beats Priors
<strong>Ablations put data quality and scale first, architecture second, biological priors third</strong> — X-Cell injects five kinds of prior knowledge, from literature embeddings to protein-interaction networks, but the causal data did the heaviest lifting.
we find that the qualities the amount of the data sets matter the most.
The Agent Codes, the Human Debugs
<strong>Agentic AI flipped the scientist's day from writing code to debugging it, making taste the scarce input</strong> — when everyone can generate code, knowing which experiments are worth running, and validating models against real wet-lab evidence, is what separates good science from burned tokens.
we used to spend lots of time coding a little bit time just debugging but now we let the agent do most of the coding but we spend most of time debugging