Back

Hi-cGAN: Prediction of Hi-C interaction matrices with conditional generative adversarial networks

Krauth, R.; Kumar, A.; Wolff, J.

2026-09-03 bioinformatics
10.64898/2026.08.30.748103 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Background: The three-dimensional organization of the genome is a fundamental aspect of its function and regulation. High-throughput chromosome conformation capture techniques, such as Hi-C, have revolutionized our understanding of spatial genome organization. However, 3C-based methods are resource-intensive and technically demanding. This has driven the development of computational approaches for predicting Hi-C interaction matrices. Hi-cGAN, a novel approach based on conditional generative adversarial networks, offers a computational alternative to extensive wet-lab work by predicting Hi-C interaction matrices. This computational approach contributes to a broader exploration and understanding of genome architecture. Findings: The network pairs a convolutional generator with a convolutional discriminator, evaluated across bin sizes, inputs and cell types. It predicts a whole genome as a cool file at bin sizes from 2 to 25 kb, where Akita, C.Origami and Epiphany emit fixed windows of 1 Mb, 2 Mb and 990 kb. With the input chosen on a validation chromosome, agreement approaches Epiphany's and stays below the sequence-based C.Origami and Akita: over Akita's 411 held-out windows the mean correlation is 0.238 against 0.506. Boundary and loop calls agree less closely, placing the maps at the domain scale. Conclusions: Chromatin factor occupancy determines a substantial part of contact structure, and two tracks capture most of it. The most informative track depends on the resolution: CTCF and the cohesin subunits at 5 to 10 kb, active histone marks at 25 kb. Transfer to an unseen cell type costs about 0.12 SCC, and which method leads depends on the measure.

Matching journals

The top 3 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.