MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154253644 · doi:10.1109/tcbb.2006.3

A Hill-Climbing Approach for Automatic Gridding of cDNA Microarray Images

2006· article· en· W2154253644 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHenan Institute of Science and TechnologyOntario Innovation Trust
KeywordsComputer scienceGridRowData miningSegmentationNoise (video)Artificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)DatabaseMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Image and statistical analysis are two important stages of cDNA microarrays. Of these, gridding is necessary to accurately identify the location of each spot while extracting spot intensities from the microarray images and automating this procedure permits high-throughput analysis. Due to the deficiencies of the equipment used to print the arrays, rotations, misalignments, high contamination with noise and artifacts, and the enormous amount of data generated, solving the gridding problem by means of an automatic system is not trivial. Existing techniques to solve the automatic grid segmentation problem cover only limited aspects of this challenging problem and require the user to specify the size of the spots, the number of rows and columns in the grid, and boundary conditions. In this paper, a hill-climbing automatic gridding and spot quantification technique is proposed which takes a microarray image (or a subgrid) as input and makes no assumptions about the size of the spots, rows, and columns in the grid. The proposed method is based on a hill-climbing approach that utilizes different objective functions. The method has been found to effectively detect the grids on microarray images drawn from databases from GEO and the Stanford genomic laboratories.

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.

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 score0.766
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.254 · 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