Back

Medea: An omics AI agent for therapeutic discovery

Sui, P.; Li, M.; Gao, S.; Shen, W.; Giunchiglia, V.; Shen, A.; Huang, Y.; Kong, Z.; Zitnik, M.

2026-01-20 bioinformatics
10.64898/2026.01.16.696667 bioRxiv
Show abstract

AI agents promise to empower biomedical discovery, but realizing this promise requires the ability to complete transparent, long-horizon analyses using tools. Agents must make intermediate decisions explicit, and validate each decision and output against data and tool constraints as the analysis unfolds. We present MO_SCPLOWEDEAC_SCPLOW, an AI agent that takes an omics objective and executes a transparent multi-step analysis using tools. MO_SCPLOWEDEAC_SCPLOW comprises four modules: research planning with context and integrity verification, code execution with pre- and post-run checks, literature reasoning with evidence-strength assessment, and a consensus stage that reconciles evidence across datasets, tools, and literature. MO_SCPLOWEDEAC_SCPLOW uses 20 tools spanning single-cell and bulk transcriptomic datasets, cancer vulnerability maps, pathway knowledge bases, and machine learning models. We evaluate MO_SCPLOWEDEAC_SCPLOW across 5,679 analyses in three open-ended domains: target identification across five diseases and cell type contexts (2,400 analyses), synthetic lethality reasoning in seven cell lines (2,385 analyses), and immunotherapy response prediction in bladder cancer (894 patient analyses). In evaluations that vary large language models, tool sets, omics objectives, and agentic modules, MO_SCPLOWEDEAC_SCPLOW improves the performance of existing approaches by up to 46% for target identification, 22% for synthetic lethality, and 24% for immunotherapy response prediction, while maintaining low failure rates and calibrated abstention. MO_SCPLOWEDEAC_SCPLOW shows that verification-aware AI agents improve performance by producing transparent analyses, not simply more efficient workflows.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.