Skip to main content
model-family passport · Review date not recorded

Tahoe-x1

Perturbation-trained single-cell foundation models scaling to 3B parameters.

4/7Evidence fields documented
60-SECOND EVALUATION VIEW

What should a scientist know before using Tahoe-x1?

SupportedEvidence supports the stated context with explicit boundaries
Best suited forRepresentation · Prediction
Evidence supportsFour disease-relevant single-cell evaluation groups: Preprint / open evaluation
Evidence does not establishUniversal superiority, therapeutic success, clinical utility or regulatory acceptance.
Major limitationPerformance depends on the evaluation dataset and operating conditions.
Current registry recordVersion history not yet curated1 recorded release · Review date not recorded. A newer version is not assumed to be universally better.

What it is

Tahoe-x1 is a family of perturbation-trained single-cell foundation models pretrained on large-scale transcriptomic datasets including Tahoe-100M. It jointly learns gene, cell and compound representations and is evaluated on cancer-relevant and perturbation-response tasks.

Evidence trail

BioAtlas keeps the path from source to decision visible. A connection records provenance; it does not imply that evidence is sufficient for every context.

Sources4 connectedPrimary resources and normalized claims
Claims1 normalizedCell perturbation prediction
EntityTahoe-x1model-family · Version history not yet curated
ReviewReview date not recordedReview date not claimed
ConclusionContext requiredAdd to an evaluation before operational use

Model passport

Entity typemodel-family
OrganizationTahoe Therapeutics
Model family introduced2025
AccessOpen source
Commercial useAllowed / verify checkpoint terms
DeploymentSelf-hosted
ComputeGPU recommended
Domainscells
Biology → representation → computation → evidence

How Tahoe-x1 represents biology

model-familycells

Category is navigation. These fields describe the model-specific computational transformation and deliberately override broad category defaults.

1 · Biological inputs
Single-cell expression profileDrug / perturbation context
2 · Input representation
Gene-expression representationDrug token
3 · Internal representation
Gene, cell and compound embeddings
4 · Architecture
Perturbation-trained single-cell foundation model
5 · Learning objective
Masked-expression generative modelling
6 · Output representation
Dense vectorsExpression predictionsScores

Biological scale

cellgenecompound-response

Modalities & tasks

Single-cell transcriptomicsPerturbation dataRepresentationPredictionPerturbation response

Registry, claims and frontier intelligence

Versioned registry

Version history not yet curated

1 version record · release year not yet normalized. Model-family identity remains separate from capability and access changes.

Explore version lineage →
Benchmark claim ledger

1 normalized claim

Cell perturbation prediction · Four disease-relevant single-cell evaluation groups

Open claim intelligence →

Inputs and outputs

Inputs

Single-cell expression profileDrug / perturbation context

Outputs

Cell representationsGene-essentiality predictionsPerturbation-response predictions

Scientific and technical profile

Scientific principles

Perturbation-trained representation learningSingle-cell generative modelling

Technology

Up to 3B parametersTahoe-100M
Ideas before algorithms

Scientific lineage

Explore all foundations

These are transparent concept matches—not claims that one scientist alone caused this model. Each connection is based on the model’s recorded domain, scientific principles, technical terms or an explicit lineage link.

Genomics & cell systems

Gene regulation and the operon model

François Jacob & Jacques Monod

Target biology, perturbation models, transcriptomic response prediction and virtual cells all require an explicit model of regulated gene programs.

Matched concepts: expression, transcript, perturbation
Molecular recognition

Cooperative ligand binding

Archibald V. Hill

Dose–response curves, receptor occupancy, multisite binding and systems pharmacology still use Hill-type models.

Matched concepts: response
Computational intelligence

Information, entropy and communication

Claude E. Shannon

Sequence modelling, cross-entropy training, language models, mutual information and representation learning all use Shannon’s framework.

Matched concepts: representation
Genomics & cell systems

The epigenetic landscape and cell-fate trajectories

Conrad H. Waddington

Single-cell embeddings, trajectory inference, reprogramming and virtual-cell models often represent cell identity as movement through a learned state landscape.

Matched concepts: single-cell
Molecular recognition

Concerted allostery

Jacques Monod, Jeffries Wyman & Jean-Pierre Changeux

Allosteric drug design exploits remote pockets to modulate function, selectivity and resistance without competing at the active site.

Matched concepts: state

Evaluation evidence

Dataset or evaluationFour disease-relevant single-cell evaluation groups
Task or metricEssentiality, cancer hallmarks, cell type and perturbation response
Evidence statusPreprint / open evaluation
Open source ↗

Task-specific evidence only; not comparable as a universal leaderboard score.

Cell perturbation prediction

Four disease-relevant single-cell evaluation groups

Version history not yet curated · Split details not yet normalized
developer-reported

A structured benchmark claim is recorded; consult the linked source for numeric values and protocol details.

Claim caveats
  • Protocol, split and implementation details must match before comparing this claim with another result.

Known limitations

  • Performance depends on the evaluation dataset and operating conditions.
  • Task-specific benchmark results should not be compared across unlike domains.
  • Outputs require task-specific scientific and experimental validation.

Milestones

2025

The authors report state-of-the-art performance across four disease-relevant evaluation groups; independent reproduction should be tracked separately.