Biologically inspired EM image alignment and neural reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Three-dimensional reconstruction of consecutive serial-section transmission electron microscopy (ssTEM) images of neural tissue currently requires many hours of manual tracing and annotation. Several computational techniques have already been applied to ssTEM images to facilitate 3D reconstruction and ease this burden. RESULTS: Here, we present an alternative computational approach for ssTEM image analysis. We have used biologically inspired receptive fields as a basis for a ridge detection algorithm to identify cell membranes, synaptic contacts and mitochondria. Detected line segments are used to improve alignment between consecutive images and we have joined small segments of membrane into cell surfaces using a dynamic programming algorithm similar to the Needleman-Wunsch and Smith-Waterman DNA sequence alignment procedures. A shortest path-based approach has been used to close edges and achieve image segmentation. Partial reconstructions were automatically generated and used as a basis for semi-automatic reconstruction of neural tissue. The accuracy of partial reconstructions was evaluated and 96% of membrane could be identified at the cost of 13% false positive detections. AVAILABILITY: An open-source reference implementation is available in the Supplementary information. CONTACT: seymour.kb@ed.ac.uk; douglas.armstrong@ed.ac.uk 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 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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".