Geometric coherence of single-cell CRISPR perturbations reveals regulatory architecture and predicts cellular stress
Abstract
Genome engineering has achieved sequence-level precision, yet predicting the transcriptomic state a cell will occupy after perturbation remains open. Single-cell CRISPR screens measure how far cells move, but effect magnitude ignores whether the cells move together. We introduce Shesha perturbation stability (S_p), which quantifies directional coherence as the mean cosine similarity between individual cell shift vectors and the mean perturbation direction. Across five CRISPR datasets (2,200+ perturbations), stability correlates with magnitude (Spearman ρ= 0.75--0.97), but discordant cases expose regulatory architecture: pleiotropic regulators such as CEBPA pay a ``geometric tax,'' producing large but incoherent shifts, while lineage-specific factors such as KLF1 produce coordinated responses. S_p and Song et al.'s perturbation-response score (PS) share partial overlap (ρ_{partial} = +0.51 after controlling for magnitude), but S_p provides significant incremental prediction of UPR pathway activation beyond both PS and magnitude (p < 10^{-18}). In a split-half reproducibility assay, S_p predicts directional reproducibility beyond magnitude (ρ_{partial} = +0.384) while PS does not (ρ_{partial} = -0.193), with the advantage consistent across all magnitude strata and both datasets. Geometric instability is independently associated with UPR activation across four datasets. S_p is implemented in the open-source shesha-geometry Python package.
Community
We introduce Shesha perturbation stability, a geometric metric that measures whether cells respond to a CRISPR perturbation by moving together or scattering across expression space. Across 5 datasets and 2,200+ perturbations, we find that pleiotropic regulators like CEBPA pay a 'geometric tax': large effects but incoherent responses. After controlling for effect size, geometric instability independently predicts chaperone stress activation (HSPA5/BiP). The relationship holds in scGPT foundation model embeddings, confirming it reflects biological geometry rather than projection artifact. Open-source implementation: shesha-geometry on PyPI.
This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.
The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API
- From Syntax to Semantics: Geometric Stability as the Missing Axis of Perturbation Biology (2026)
- Lingshu-Cell: A generative cellular world model for transcriptome modeling toward virtual cells (2026)
- Multi-Dimensional Spectral Geometry of Biological Knowledge in Single-Cell Transformer Representations (2026)
- PerturbDiff: Functional Diffusion for Single-Cell Perturbation Modeling (2026)
- What Topological and Geometric Structure Do Biological Foundation Models Learn? Evidence from 141 Hypotheses (2026)
- Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Predicting Cellular Responses to Gene Perturbation (2026)
Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!
If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space
You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend
Get this paper in your agent:
hf papers read 2604.16642 Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash Models citing this paper 1
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper