MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142468475 · doi:10.1002/jemt.21017

Adaptive‐weighted cubic B‐spline using lookup tables for fast and efficient axial resampling of 3D confocal microscopy images

2011· article· en· W2142468475 on OpenAlexafffund
C. Indhumathi, Yiyu Cai, Frank Guan, Michał Opas, Jianmin Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroscopy Research and Technique · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsResamplingConfocalConfocal microscopyLookup tableMicroscopyMaterials scienceAlgorithmOpticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Confocal laser scanning microscopy has become a most powerful tool to visualize and analyze the dynamic behavior of cellular molecules. Photobleaching of fluorochromes is a major problem with confocal image acquisition that will lead to intensity attenuation. Photobleaching effect can be reduced by optimizing the collection efficiency of the confocal image by fast z-scanning. However, such images suffer from distortions, particularly in the z dimension, which causes disparities in the x, y, and z directions of the voxels with the original image stacks. As a result, reliable segmentation and feature extraction of these images may be difficult or even impossible. Image interpolation is especially needed for the correction of undersampling artifact in the axial plane of three-dimensional images generated by a confocal microscope to obtain cubic voxels. In this work, we present an adaptive cubic B-spline-based interpolation with the aid of lookup tables by deriving adaptive weights based on local gradients for the sampling nodes in the interpolation formulae. Thus, the proposed method enhances the axial resolution of confocal images by improving the accuracy of the interpolated value simultaneously with great reduction in computational cost. Numerical experimental results confirm the effectiveness of the proposed interpolation approach and demonstrate its superiority both in terms of accuracy and speed compared to other interpolation algorithms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.085
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicroscopy Research and TechniqueSame topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207