A probabilistic cell model in background corrected image sequences for single cell analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Methods of manual cell localization and outlining are so onerous that automated tracking methods would seem mandatory for handling huge image sequences, nevertheless manual tracking is, astonishingly, still widely practiced in areas such as cell biology which are outside the influence of most image processing research. The goal of our research is to address this gap by developing automated methods of cell tracking, localization, and segmentation. Since even an optimal frame-to-frame association method cannot compensate and recover from poor detection, it is clear that the quality of cell tracking depends on the quality of cell detection within each frame. METHODS: Cell detection performs poorly where the background is not uniform and includes temporal illumination variations, spatial non-uniformities, and stationary objects such as well boundaries (which confine the cells under study). To improve cell detection, the signal to noise ratio of the input image can be increased via accurate background estimation. In this paper we investigate background estimation, for the purpose of cell detection. We propose a cell model and a method for background estimation, driven by the proposed cell model, such that well structure can be identified, and explicitly rejected, when estimating the background. RESULTS: The resulting background-removed images have fewer artifacts and allow cells to be localized and detected more reliably. The experimental results generated by applying the proposed method to different Hematopoietic Stem Cell (HSC) image sequences are quite promising. CONCLUSION: The understanding of cell behavior relies on precise information about the temporal dynamics and spatial distribution of cells. Such information may play a key role in disease research and regenerative medicine, so automated methods for observation and measurement of cells from microscopic images are in high demand. The proposed method in this paper is capable of localizing single cells in microwells and can be adapted for the other cell types that may not have circular shape. This method can be potentially used for single cell analysis to study the temporal dynamics of cells.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".