Tilt-Pair Analysis of Images from a Range of Different Specimens in Single-Particle Electron Cryomicroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The comparison of a pair of electron microscope images recorded at different specimen tilt angles provides a powerful approach for evaluating the quality of images, image-processing procedures, or three-dimensional structures. Here, we analyze tilt-pair images recorded from a range of specimens with different symmetries and molecular masses and show how the analysis can produce valuable information not easily obtained otherwise. We show that the accuracy of orientation determination of individual single particles depends on molecular mass, as expected theoretically since the information in each particle image increases with molecular mass. The angular uncertainty is less than 1° for particles of high molecular mass (~50 MDa), several degrees for particles in the range 1-5 MDa, and tens of degrees for particles below 1 MDa. Orientational uncertainty may be the major contributor to the effective temperature factor (B-factor) describing contrast loss and therefore the maximum resolution of a structure determination. We also made two unexpected observations. Single particles that are known to be flexible showed a wider spread in orientation accuracy, and the orientations of the largest particles examined changed by several degrees during typical low-dose exposures. Smaller particles presumably also reorient during the exposure; hence, specimen movement is a second major factor that limits resolution. Tilt pairs thus enable assessment of orientation accuracy, map quality, specimen motion, and conformational heterogeneity. A convincing tilt-pair parameter plot, where 60% of the particles show a single cluster around the expected tilt axis and tilt angle, provides confidence in a structure determined using electron cryomicroscopy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".