A Robust Co-Localisation Measurement Utilising Z-Stack Image Intensity Similarities for Biological Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Co-localisation is a widely used measurement in immunohistochemical analysis to determine if fluorescently labelled biological entities, such as cells, proteins or molecules share a same location. However the measurement of co-localisation is challenging due to the complex nature of such fluorescent images, especially when multiple focal planes are captured. The current state-of-art co-localisation measurements of 3-dimensional (3D) image stacks are biased by noise and cross-overs from non-consecutive planes. METHOD: In this study, we have developed Co-localisation Intensity Coefficients (CICs) and Co-localisation Binary Coefficients (CBCs), which uses rich z-stack data from neighbouring focal planes to identify similarities between image intensities of two and potentially more fluorescently-labelled biological entities. This was developed using z-stack images from murine organotypic slice cultures from central nervous system tissue, and two sets of pseudo-data. A large amount of non-specific cross-over situations are excluded using this method. This proposed method is also proven to be robust in recognising co-localisations even when images are polluted with a range of noises. RESULTS: The proposed CBCs and CICs produce robust co-localisation measurements which are easy to interpret, resilient to noise and capable of removing a large amount of false positivity, such as non-specific cross-overs. Performance of this method of measurement is significantly more accurate than existing measurements, as determined statistically using pseudo datasets of known values. This method provides an important and reliable tool for fluorescent 3D neurobiological studies, and will benefit other biological studies which measure fluorescence co-localisation in 3D.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".