MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003730814 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2010.5626380

A spectral k-means approach to bright-field cell image segmentation

2010· article· en· W2003730814 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Bradbury, Justin W. L. Wan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImage segmentationSegmentationArtificial intelligenceSpectral clusteringComputer scienceComputer visionHaloScale-space segmentationSegmentation-based object categorizationCluster analysisPattern recognition (psychology)Eigenvalues and eigenvectorsImage (mathematics)Field (mathematics)GraphMathematicsPhysicsTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automatic segmentation of bright-field cell images is important to cell biologists, but difficult to complete due to the complex nature of the cells in bright-field images (poor contrast, broken halo, missing boundaries). Standard approaches such as level set segmentation and active contours work well for fluorescent images where cells appear as round shape, but become less effective when optical artifacts such as halo exist in bright-field images. In this paper, we present a robust segmentation method which combines the spectral and k-means clustering techniques to locate cells in bright-field images. This approach models an image as a matrix graph and segment different regions of the image by computing the appropriate eigenvectors of the matrix graph and using the k-means algorithm. We illustrate the effectiveness of the method by segmentation results of C2C12 (muscle) cells in bright-field images.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations25
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207