Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This research exposes a critical vulnerability in single-cell annotation pipelines where removing specific non-target cells can manipulate refined labels without altering the underlying model or target data profile. The study demonstrates that neighborhood refinement mechanisms create an attack surface, significantly affecting predictions when structured removal methods are applied to query cohorts. These findings underscore the necessity of auditing cohort composition and refining strategies before deploying automated cell typing tools in sensitive biological applications.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

CohortHijack: Robustness of Single Cell Annotation to Companion Cell Removal

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2608.05900v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Many single-cell annotation tools refine an initial cell label using nearby cells or cluster-level voting. We study whether this refinement can be manipulated without changing the target cell. We introduce CohortHijack, a robustness audit that removes selected non-target cells from the query cohort while preserving the target expression profile, base prediction, and trained model. We evaluate random and structured removal methods, together with greedy, multi-start, and beam search, on PBMC3K and Paul15 using logistic regression and calibrated linear SVM classifiers. Structured removal was consistently stronger than random removal on Paul15. Multi-start search changed 24.33% of linear-SVM targets and 19.67% of logistic-regression targets while removing a small fraction of the cohort and keeping mean collateral changes below 0.4%. Ablations confirmed that the effect disappeared when neighborhood refinement was disabled. We also evaluated CellTypist majority voting, where independent predictions remained unchanged across all evaluations, but refined labels changed after small companion-cell removals. These findings identify query cohort composition as a target-preserving attack surface in single-cell annotation.

Abstract:Many single-cell annotation tools refine an initial cell label using nearby cells or cluster-level voting. We study whether this refinement can be manipulated without changing the target cell. We introduce CohortHijack, a robustness audit that removes selected non-target cells from the query cohort while preserving the target expression profile, base prediction, and trained model. We evaluate random and structured removal methods, together with greedy, multi-start, and beam search, on PBMC3K and Paul15 using logistic regression and calibrated linear SVM classifiers. Structured removal was consistently stronger than random removal on Paul15. Multi-start search changed 24.33% of linear-SVM targets and 19.67% of logistic-regression targets while removing a small fraction of the cohort and keeping mean collateral changes below 0.4%. Ablations confirmed that the effect disappeared when neighborhood refinement was disabled. We also evaluated CellTypist majority voting, where independent predictions remained unchanged across all evaluations, but refined labels changed after small companion-cell removals. These findings identify query cohort composition as a target-preserving attack surface in single-cell annotation.

Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2608.05900 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2608.05900v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.05900 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 258 words

Related coverage