Optimization of a highly standardized carboxyfluorescein succinimidyl ester flow cytometry panel and gating strategy design using discriminative information measure evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The design of a panel to identify target cell subsets in flow cytometry can be difficult when specific markers unique to each cell subset do not exist, and a combination of parameters must be used to identify target cells of interest and exclude irrelevant events. Thus, the ability to objectively measure the contribution of a parameter or group of parameters toward target cell identification independent of any gating strategy could be very helpful for both panel design and gating strategy design. In this article, we propose a discriminative information measure evaluation (DIME) based on statistical mixture modeling; DIME is a numerical measure of the contribution of different parameters towards discriminating a target cell subset from all the others derived from the fitted posterior distribution of a Gaussian mixture model. Informally, DIME measures the "usefulness" of each parameter for identifying a target cell subset. We show how DIME provides an objective basis for inclusion or exclusion of specific parameters in a panel, and how ranked sets of such parameters can be used to optimize gating strategies. An illustrative example of the application of DIME to streamline the gating strategy for a highly standardized carboxyfluorescein succinimidyl ester (CFSE) assay is described.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".