MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989915277 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2013.2248008

Intensity Integrated Laplacian-Based Thickness Measurement for Detecting Human Metaphase Chromosome Centromere Location

2013· article· en· W1989915277 on OpenAlexaff
A. S. Arachchige, Jagath Samarabandu, Joan H.M. Knoll, Peter K. Rogan

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
KeywordsCentromereMetaphaseSister chromatidsChromosomeImage segmentationComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmSegmentationChromatidMathematicsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionBiologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate detection of the human metaphase chromosome centromere is an important step in many chromosome analysis and medical diagnosis algorithms. The centromere location can be utilized to derive information such as the chromosome type, polarity assignment, etc. Methods available in the literature yield unreliable results mainly due to high variability of morphology in metaphase chromosomes and boundary noise present in the image. In this paper, we have proposed a multistaged algorithm which includes the use of discrete curve evolution, gradient vector flow active contours, functional approximation of curve segments, and support vector machine classification. The standard Laplacian thickness measurement algorithm was enhanced to incorporate both contour information as well as intensity information to obtain a more accurate centromere location. In addition to segmentation and width profile measurement, the proposed algorithm can also correct for sister chromatid separation in cell images. The proposed method was observed to be more accurate and statistically significant as compared to a centerline-based method when tested with 226 human metaphase chromosomes.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.788
Threshold uncertainty score0.746

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations27
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207