MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Image segmentation for integrated multiphoton microscopy and reflectance confocal microscopy imaging of human skin in vivo.

2015· article· en· W2181138110 on OpenAlexaff
Guannan Chen, Harvey Lui, Haishan Zeng

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal HealthBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSegmentationConfocalConfocal microscopyArtificial intelligenceMicroscopyComputer scienceHuman skinComputer visionImage segmentationIn vivoLevel set (data structures)Preclinical imagingBiomedical engineeringPathologyBiologyOpticsMedicinePhysicsCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Non-invasive cellular imaging of the skin in vivo can be achieved in reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) and multiphoton microscopy (MPM) modalities to yield complementary images of the skin based on different optical properties. One of the challenges of in vivo microscopy is the delineation (i.e., segmentation) of cellular and subcellular architectural features. METHODS: In this work we present a method for combining watershed and level-set models for segmentation of multimodality images obtained by an integrated MPM and RCM imaging system from human skin in vivo. RESULTS: Firstly, a segmentation model based on watershed is introduced for obtaining the accurate structure of cell borders from the RCM image. Secondly,, a global region based energy level-set model is constructed for extracting the nucleus of each cell from the MPM image. Thirdly, a local region-based Lagrange Continuous level-set approach is used for segmenting cytoplasm from the MPM image. CONCLUSIONS: Experimental results demonstrated that cell borders from RCM image and boundaries of cytoplasm and nucleus from MPM image can be obtained by our segmentation method with better accuracy and effectiveness. We are planning to use this method to perform quantitative analysis of MPM and RCM images of in vivo human skin to study the variations of cellular parameters such as cell size, nucleus size and other mophormetric features with skin pathologies.

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 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.660

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207