A data-driven evaluation of Optimization techniques in Cell Culture Media
Clicks: 1
ID: 325531
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
0.0
/100
1 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Ranked #813 of 818 articles by views in BMC Bioinformatics
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 818 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Optimizing cell-culture media for cultivated meat and cellular agriculture is both experimentally demanding and expensive. Traditional approaches employ Design of Experiments (DOE) to iterate through candidate formulations until a satisfactory medium emerges. Data-driven methods, and in particular Bayesian optimization (BO), can reach higher objective function values (here, titer) with fewer evaluations than classical DOE. Prior comparisons of optimizers on cell-media data have, however, relied largely on computational simulations rather than measured formulations, leaving researchers without evidence-based guidance on which strategy to adopt. RESULTS: We introduce two complementary benchmark protocols and apply them to six published cell-culture datasets. In the "Hide-the-Label" protocol each optimizer begins with only a partial view of the data and sequentially reveals hidden formulations, singly or in batches, reproducing the stepwise acquisition of costly laboratory measurements; the "Open Race" instead measures search efficiency of a method under a fixed evaluation budget. Both protocols were run across four generative surrogate classes (Gaussian process (GP), random forest, neural network, and Bayesian neural network), two difficulty regimes, and batch sizes of one to 20. GP-based BO was consistently the most sample-efficient strategy, locating hidden targets in substantially fewer evaluations than classical DOE designs or random search; its advantage narrowed but remained under injected noise and multi-modality, and optimizers built on more complex surrogates (deeper networks or adaptive ensembles) performed worse rather than better on these harder landscapes. We detail the mathematical basis of the benchmark, criteria for selecting suitable datasets, and how to obtain statistically robust conclusions in the presence of measurement bias and heterogeneity, and we provide a roadmap for selecting an optimization strategy in practice. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Source code and the benchmark datasets are freely available at https://github.com/Amii-Applied-AI/amii-cell-ag-tools/tree/main/active-learning-for-cell-media and archived at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21501659. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7203788241
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Ali Parsaee, Miranda Stahn, Arian Amirvaresi, Reza Ovissipour, David Staszak |
| Journal | BMC Bioinformatics |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/bioinformatics/btag607
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.