MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161921787 · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btv630

Fast Optimized Cluster Algorithm for Localizations (FOCAL): a spatial cluster analysis for super-resolved microscopy

2015· article· en· W2161921787 on OpenAlexafffund
Amir Mazouchi, Joshua N. Milstein

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDBSCANFocus (optics)Cluster analysisComputer scienceScalingAlgorithmCluster (spacecraft)SoftwareMicroscopyArtificial intelligenceCardinal pointPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsPhysicsOpticsGeometryFuzzy clustering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MOTIVATION: Single-molecule localization microscopy (SMLM) microscopy provides images of cellular structure at a resolution an order of magnitude below what can be achieved by conventional diffraction limited techniques. The concomitantly larger data sets generated by SMLM require increasingly efficient image analysis software. Density based clustering algorithms, with the most ubiquitous being DBSCAN, are commonly used to quantitatively assess sub-cellular assemblies. DBSCAN, however, is slow, scaling with the number of localizations like O(n log (n)) at best, and it's performance is highly dependent upon a subjectively selected choice of parameters. RESULTS: We have developed a grid-based clustering algorithm FOCAL, which explicitly accounts for several dominant artifacts arising in SMLM image reconstructions. FOCAL is fast and efficient, scaling like O(n), and only has one set parameter. We assess DBSCAN and FOCAL on experimental dSTORM data of clusters of eukaryotic RNAP II and PALM data of the bacterial protein H-NS, then provide a detailed comparison via simulation. FOCAL performs comparable and often superior to DBSCAN while yielding a significantly faster analysis. Additionally, FOCAL provides a novel method for filtering out of focus clusters from complex SMLM images. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The data and code are available at: http://www.utm.utoronto.ca/milsteinlab/resources/Software/FOCAL/ CONTACT: josh.milstein@utoronto.ca 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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations59
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformaticsSame topicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207