MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043070197 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0026007

A TMA De-Arraying Method for High Throughput Biomarker Discovery in Tissue Research

2011· article· en· W2043070197 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yinhai Wang, Kienan I. Savage, Claire Grills, Andrena McCavigan, Jacqueline A. James, Dean A. Fennell, Peter W. Hamilton

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's UniversityPublic Health AgencyQueen's University BelfastDepartment for Employment and Learning, Northern Ireland
KeywordsSegmentationComputer scienceCore (optical fiber)Artificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)ThresholdingSingle-coreImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Tissue MicroArrays (TMAs) represent a potential high-throughput platform for the analysis and discovery of tissue biomarkers. As TMA slides are produced manually and subject to processing and sectioning artefacts, the layout of TMA cores on the final slide and subsequent digital scan (TMA digital slide) is often disturbed making it difficult to associate cores with their original position in the planned TMA map. Additionally, the individual cores can be greatly altered and contain numerous irregularities such as missing cores, grid rotation and stretching. These factors demand the development of a robust method for de-arraying TMAs which identifies each TMA core, and assigns them to their appropriate coordinates on the constructed TMA slide. METHODOLOGY: This study presents a robust TMA de-arraying method consisting of three functional phases: TMA core segmentation, gridding and mapping. The segmentation of TMA cores uses a set of morphological operations to identify each TMA core. Gridding then utilises a Delaunay Triangulation based method to find the row and column indices of each TMA core. Finally, mapping correlates each TMA core from a high resolution TMA whole slide image with its name within a TMAMap. CONCLUSION: This study describes a genuine robust TMA de-arraying algorithm for the rapid identification of TMA cores from digital slides. The result of this de-arraying algorithm allows the easy partition of each TMA core for further processing. Based on a test group of 19 TMA slides (3129 cores), 99.84% of cores were segmented successfully, 99.81% of cores were gridded correctly and 99.96% of cores were mapped with their correct names via TMAMaps. The gridding of TMA cores were also extensively tested using a set of 113 pseudo slide (13,536 cores) with a variety of irregular grid layouts including missing cores, rotation and stretching. 100% of the cores were gridded correctly.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.367
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.312
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.074 · 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
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

Citations11
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207