Robust quantitative scratch assay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: The wound healing assay (or scratch assay) is a technique frequently used to quantify the dependence of cell motility-a central process in tissue repair and evolution of disease-subject to various treatments conditions. However processing the resulting data is a laborious task due its high throughput and variability across images. This Robust Quantitative Scratch Assay algorithm introduced statistical outputs where migration rates are estimated, cellular behaviour is distinguished and outliers are identified among groups of unique experimental conditions. Furthermore, the RQSA decreased measurement errors and increased accuracy in the wound boundary at comparable processing times compared to previously developed method (TScratch). AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The RQSA is freely available at: http://ophid.utoronto.ca/RQSA/RQSA_Scripts.zip The image sets used for training and validation and results are available at: (http://ophid.utoronto.ca/RQSA/trainingSet.zip, http://ophid.utoronto.ca/RQSA/validationSet.zip, http://ophid.utoronto.ca/RQSA/ValidationSetResults.zip, http://ophid.utoronto.ca/RQSA/ValidationSet_H1975.zip, http://ophid.utoronto.ca/RQSA/ValidationSet_H1975Results.zip, http://ophid.utoronto.ca/RQSA/RobustnessSet.zip, http://ophid.utoronto.ca/RQSA/RobustnessSet.zip). Supplementary Material is provided for detailed description of the development of the RQSA. CONTACT: juris@ai.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 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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.028 |
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".