Back to Authors

Zhu, Dajiang

0000-0002-6940-3911

Mayo Clinic

The University of Texas at Arlington

Citations 5

Large language models for bioinformatics
Ruan, Wei, Lyu, Yanjun , Zhang, Jing , Cai, Jiazhang , Lu, Yao , Wang, Tao , Liu, Yufang , Fang, Luyang , Liu, Ziyu , Liu, Zhengliang , Li, Yiwei , Wu, Zihao , Chen, Junhao , Jiang, Hanqi, Yang, Zhenyuan, Liang, Shizhe, Zhang, Wei , Ma, Terry, Dou, Yuan , Zhang, Jianli , Gong, Xinyu , Gan, Qi , Zou, Yusong , Chen, Z. J. , Qian, Yuanxin, Yu, Shuo , Song, Kenan, Sikora, Andrea, Li, Xiang , Wang, Yingfeng , Zhong, Wenxuan, Liu, Rongjie , Huang, Chao , Shen, Ye , Yan, Yajun , Liu, Tianming, Huang, Chao , Song, Kenan , Wang, Peilong, Chen, Jingyuan, Song, Kenan , Ruan, Wei, Shu, Peng , Yang, Ge , Gao, Shang , Wang, Yue , Wang, Peilong , Zhao, Lin , Jiang, Hanqi , Pan, Yi Feng , Chen, Jingyuan , Dou, Yuan, Chen, Z. J. , Qian, Yuanxin, Jin, Lu , Wang, Xianqiao , Sikora, Andrea , Li, Gang , Li, Quanzheng , Zhang, Lu, Abate, Yohannes , He, Lifang , Zhong, Wenxuan, Liu, Wei , Ma, Ping , Zhu, Hongtu , Zhu, Dajiang

Quantitative Biology | September 29, 2025 | Volume: 14 | Issue: 1 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/qub2.70014 Get It

Abstract With the rapid advancements in large language model technology and the emergence of bioinformatics‐specific language models (BioLMs), there is a growing need for a comprehensive analysis of the current landscape, computational characteristics, and diverse applications. This survey aims to address this need by providing a thorough review of BioLMs, focusing on their evolution, classification, and distinguishing features, alongside a detailed examination of training methodologies, datasets, and evaluation frameworks. We explore the wide‐ranging applications of BioLMs in critical areas such as disease diagnosis, drug discovery, and vaccine development, highlighting their impact and transformative potential in bioinformatics. We identify key challenges and limitations inherent in BioLMs, including data privacy and security concerns, interpretability issues, biases in training data and model outputs, and domain adaptation complexities. Finally, we highlight emerging trends and future directions, offering valuable insights to guide researchers and clinicians toward advancing BioLMs for increasingly sophisticated biological and clinical applications.
Exploring the Trade-Offs: Unified Large Language Models vs Local Fine-Tuned Models for Highly-Specific Radiology NLI Task
Wu, Zihao , Zhang, Lu , Cao, Chao , Liu, Zhengliang , Zhao, Lin , Li, Yiwei , Dai, Haixing , Ma, Chong , Li, Gang , Liu, Tianming , Wu, Zihao , Zhang, Lu , Yu, Xiaowei , Liu, Wei , Li, Quanzheng , Shen, Dinggang G. , Li, Xiang , Zhu, Dajiang , Liu, Tianming

IEEE Transactions on Big Data | February 13, 2025 | Volume: 11 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 1027-1041

10.1109/tbdata.2025.3536928 Get It

AugGPT: Leveraging ChatGPT for Text Data Augmentation
Dai, Haixing , Liu, Zhengliang , Liao, Wenxiong , Huang, Xiaoke , Wu, Zihao , Zhao, Lin , Xu, Shaochen , Zeng, Fang , Liu, Wei , Liu, Ninghao , Shen, Dinggang, Liu, Tianming , Li, Xiang , Liu, Wei , Cao, Yihan , Li, Sheng , Zhu, Dajiang , Cai, Hongmin , Sun, Lichao , Li, Quanzheng , Shen, Dinggang G. , Li, Xiang

IEEE Transactions on Big Data | January 30, 2025 | Volume: 11 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 907-918

10.1109/tbdata.2025.3536934 Get It

Artificial General Intelligence for Medical Imaging Analysis
Li, Xiang , Zhao, Lin , Zhang, Lu , Wu, Zihao , Liu, Zhengliang , Jiang, Hanqi , Cao, Chao , Xu, Shaochen , Li, Yiwei , Dai, Haixing , Liu, Jun , Liu, Tianming , Yuan, Yixuan , Li, Gang , Zhu, Dajiang , Yan, Pingkun , Li, Quanzheng , Liu, Wei , Shen, Dinggang G.

IEEE Reviews in Biomedical Engineering | November 7, 2024 | Volume: 18 | Issue: No issue available | Pages: 113-129

10.1109/rbme.2024.3493775 Get It

Technical note: Generalizable and promptable artificial intelligence model to augment clinical delineation in radiation oncology
Liu, Zhengliang , Zhang, Lu , Feng, Hongying , Dai, Haixing , Li, Xiang , Wong, William W. , Vora, Sujay A., Liu, Tianming , Zhang, Lian , Wu, Zihao , Yu, Xiaowei , Holmes, Jason , Li, Quanzheng , Zhu, Dajiang , Liu, Wei

Medical Physics | February 7, 2024 | Volume: 51 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 2187-2199

10.1002/mp.16965 Get It

Abstract Background Efficient and accurate delineation of organs at risk (OARs) is a critical procedure for treatment planning and dose evaluation. Deep learning‐based auto‐segmentation of OARs has shown promising results and is increasingly being used in radiation therapy. However, existing deep learning‐based auto‐segmentation approaches face two challenges in clinical practice: generalizability and human‐AI interaction. A generalizable and promptable auto‐segmentation model, which segments OARs of multiple disease sites simultaneously and supports on‐the‐fly human‐AI interaction, can significantly enhance the efficiency of radiation therapy treatment planning. Purpose Meta's segment anything model (SAM) was proposed as a generalizable and promptable model for next‐generation natural image segmentation. We further evaluated the performance of SAM in radiotherapy segmentation. Methods Computed tomography (CT) images of clinical cases from four disease sites at our institute were collected: prostate, lung, gastrointestinal, and head & neck. For each case, we selected the OARs important in radiotherapy treatment planning. We then compared both the Dice coefficients and Jaccard indices derived from three distinct methods: manual delineation (ground truth), automatic segmentation using SAM's ’segment anything’ mode, and automatic segmentation using SAM's ‘box prompt’ mode that implements manual interaction via live prompts during segmentation. Results Our results indicate that SAM's segment anything mode can achieve clinically acceptable segmentation results in most OARs with Dice scores higher than 0.7. SAM's box prompt mode further improves Dice scores by 0.1∼0.5. Similar results were observed for Jaccard indices. The results show that SAM performs better for prostate and lung, but worse for gastrointestinal and head & neck. When considering the size of organs and the distinctiveness of their boundaries, SAM shows better performance for large organs with distinct boundaries, such as lung and liver, and worse for smaller organs with less distinct boundaries, like parotid and cochlea. Conclusions Our results demonstrate SAM's robust generalizability with consistent accuracy in automatic segmentation for radiotherapy. Furthermore, the advanced box‐prompt method enables the users to augment auto‐segmentation interactively and dynamically, leading to patient‐specific auto‐segmentation in radiation therapy. SAM's generalizability across different disease sites and different modalities makes it feasible to develop a generic auto‐segmentation model in radiotherapy.