Papers for

synthetic biology developers

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Language models tested on full molecular cloning experiment plans

BenchBench-Cloning: Evaluating Molecular Cloning Design and Protocol Development

Abstract: Molecular cloning is one of the most routine wet-lab workflows, yet existing evaluations of language models in biology mostly test knowledge recall or isolated steps rather than end-to-end experimental planning. We introduce BenchBench-Cloning, a benchmark for large language models comprising 65 molecular cloning tasks grounded in sequence records, laboratory notebooks, and published experimental studies. Planning a molecular cloning experiment requires defining a set of constructs needed for a scientific objective and a construction route to produce them. BenchBench-Cloning contains 50 protocol-development tasks, in which agents produce an executable protocol for a specified construct, and 15 construct-design tasks, in which agents determine the constructs a scientific objective calls for. Protocol-development tasks are evaluated by execution in a cloning simulator; construct-design tasks are evaluated with task-specific deterministic checks and, where needed, rubric-based LLM-as-a-judge evaluation. Across eight systems with repeated attempts per task, GPT-6 Astra scores highest at 30.6%, with the others between 8.6% and 22.2%, and the benchmark remains unsaturated under best-of-ten sampling. As integrating individual cloning decisions into complete, valid plans remains challenging even for frontier models, we expect BenchBench-Cloning to serve as a useful benchmark for tracking progress in experimental planning.

Fri 23 OctArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Molecular cloning is a common lab process where biologists create specific DNA sequences for experiments. The authors made a benchmark called BenchBench-Cloning to test how well language models can plan entire cloning experiments, including designing DNA constructs and writing detailed lab protocols. They found that even top models struggle to successfully plan full cloning workflows, with the best one achieving just over 30% success. This shows how complex experimental planning is and gives a new way to measure progress in AI tools for biology.
Open → 2610.33355v1

Mixture of generative flow networks improves diverse high-reward sampling

Mixture of GFlowNets

Abstract: Generative Flow Networks (GFlowNets) learn a policy that samples compositional objects in proportion to an unnormalized reward $R(x)$. This makes them useful wherever many diverse, high-reward candidates are needed and oracle queries are expensive. In practice, a single GFlowNet often fails to cover all modes of a complex distribution, and the obvious ways to scale compute saturate: larger batches and data-parallel gradient averaging draw every trajectory from one, possibly biased, policy, so extra rollouts rediscover known modes instead of finding new ones. We explore whether this mode-bias problem (mode collapse in the extreme) can be addressed with a population of asynchronously trained policies which divide the state space between them. Mixture of GFlowNets (MoG) replaces the single forward policy with a community of $K$ independent GFlowNets coupled through one jointly trained soft classifier, which assigns each member its own region of the state space through reward shaping. Mixing the members under their learned partition functions provably recovers the target $p(x)\propto R(x)$. MoG exchange (MoGX) also lets the classifier route sampled trajectories: a trajectory the classifier assigns to another member is sent to that member and trained on there, with no importance sampling. We evaluate both methods by keeping the environment-interaction budget fixed while scaling the community size, turning parallel compute into mode coverage without extra oracle calls. On HyperGrid, across six reward landscapes and communities of up to $K{=}64$, MoG and MoGX keep finding new modes as $K$ grows, while data-parallel training saturates. On a genomic ideotype-design task, MoGX covers $39%$ of the $1024$ optima at $K{=}64$, against $31\%$ for independent agents and $20\%$ for data-parallel training. MoG also has a lower per-iteration synchronization cost than data-parallel training.

Mon 12 OctMachine LearningDistributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing
The gist
Sampling diverse high-quality solutions can be hard when using just one model, as it may miss some options. The authors study using a group of independently trained models, called Mixture of GFlowNets, that split the search space among them to cover more possibilities. Their approach routes data between models to focus learning efficiently and can find more distinct solutions than standard methods. They show this works well on complex tasks like designing genetic sequences where many good options exist.
Open → 2610.17007v1

Machine learning trims dna sequences to keep function while shortening

From DNA Design to DNA Slimming: Auditable Agentic Discovery of a Deletion-Only Designer

Abstract: Compact regulatory DNA can free up space in vector payloads, reduce synthesis and assay burden, and expose which sequence features drive predicted activity. Yet most model-based nucleic-acid designers optimize fixed-length sequences through substitutions; they do not ask which bases of an existing functional element can be removed while retaining predicted activity. We define the task of sequence slimming as selecting an exact-length, order-preserving subsequence while retaining activity. Modeled on the design benchmark NucleoBench, we propose a quantitative evaluation for slimming that balances sequence reduction with maintaining function. Each slimmer must return both the subsequence and its source indices, which can be used to verify that the slimmer obeyed task requirements. To our knowledge, this is the first dedicated benchmark of this deletion-only problem. The coding agent Empirical Research Assistant (ERA) then searched over executable designer programs. ERA received the task prompt and a successful substitution-only designer GrAdaBeam as a starting program, and it modified the designer to produce GRADASLIM. We report held-out evaluations for five transcription-factor binding targets, comparing random, greedy, and ERA-guided slimming at 400 and 100 bp. ERA has the highest mean in 9/10 settings. Paired bootstrap intervals for ERA minus greedy are above zero in all five 400-bp settings, below zero in one 100-bp setting, and overlap zero in the remaining four.

Wed 30 SeptMachine LearningNeural and Evolutionary Computing
The gist
DNA sequences used in experiments can be made shorter to save space and effort while keeping their important functions. Most methods change DNA by swapping bases but do not try to remove parts without losing function. The authors define a new task to find a shorter version of a DNA sequence by deleting bases while keeping it working. They built a system called ERA that improved on earlier designs to find these shorter sequences and tested it on several DNA targets with good results.
Open → 2609.40143v1