MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076448238 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btu759

Local statistics allow quantification of cell-to-cell variability from high-throughput microscope images

2014· article· en· W2076448238 on OpenAlexafffund
Louis‐François Handfield, Bob Strome, Yolanda Chong, Alan M Moses

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCellProtein subcellular localization predictionMicroscopeSubcellular localizationMicroscopyBiologyComputational biologyCell biologyCytoplasmPathologyGeneticsGeneMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Motivation: Quantifying variability in protein expression is a major goal of systems biology and cell-to-cell variability in subcellular localization pattern has not been systematically quantified. Results: We define a local measure to quantify cell-to-cell variability in high-throughput microscope images and show that it allows comparable measures of variability for proteins with diverse subcellular localizations. We systematically estimate cell-to-cell variability in the yeast GFP collection and identify examples of proteins that show cell-to-cell variability in their subcellular localization. Conclusions: Automated image analysis methods can be used to quantify cell-to-cell variability in microscope images. Contact: alan.moses@utoronto.ca Availability and Implementation: Software and data are available at http://www.moseslab.csb.utoronto.ca/louis-f/ Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score0.744

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207