MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980625890 · doi:10.3791/51325

Reconstruction of 3-Dimensional Histology Volume and its Application to Study Mouse Mammary Glands

2014· article· en· W1980625890 on OpenAlexafffund
Rushin Shojaii, Stephanie Bacopulos, Wenyi Yang, Tigran Karavardanyan, Demetri D. Spyropoulos, Afshin Raouf, Anne L. Martel, Arun Seth

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchTerry Fox FoundationSunnybrook Research Institute
KeywordsHistologyVolume (thermodynamics)H&E stain3D reconstructionImage registrationComputer scienceHigh resolutionAnatomyBiomedical engineeringPathologyBiologyArtificial intelligenceMedicineStainingImage (mathematics)Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Histology volume reconstruction facilitates the study of 3D shape and volume change of an organ at the level of macrostructures made up of cells. It can also be used to investigate and validate novel techniques and algorithms in volumetric medical imaging and therapies. Creating 3D high-resolution atlases of different organs(1,2,3) is another application of histology volume reconstruction. This provides a resource for investigating tissue structures and the spatial relationship between various cellular features. We present an image registration approach for histology volume reconstruction, which uses a set of optical blockface images. The reconstructed histology volume represents a reliable shape of the processed specimen with no propagated post-processing registration error. The Hematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) stained sections of two mouse mammary glands were registered to their corresponding blockface images using boundary points extracted from the edges of the specimen in histology and blockface images. The accuracy of the registration was visually evaluated. The alignment of the macrostructures of the mammary glands was also visually assessed at high resolution. This study delineates the different steps of this image registration pipeline, ranging from excision of the mammary gland through to 3D histology volume reconstruction. While 2D histology images reveal the structural differences between pairs of sections, 3D histology volume provides the ability to visualize the differences in shape and volume of the mammary glands.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.343 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207