MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2397837821 · doi:10.1038/srep20640

Fluorescence microscopy image noise reduction using a stochastically-connected random field model

2016· article· en· W2397837821 on OpenAlexafffund
Shahid A. Haider, Andrew Cameron, P. Siva, Dorothy Lui, Mohammad Javad Shafiee, Ameneh Boroomand, Nadia Haider, Alexander Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Waterloo
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsNoise (video)MicroscopyFluorescence microscopeNoise reductionBiological systemComputer scienceSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)FluorescenceAlgorithmArtificial intelligencePhysicsOpticsImage (mathematics)BiologyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fluorescence microscopy is an essential part of a biologist's toolkit, allowing assaying of many parameters like subcellular localization of proteins, changes in cytoskeletal dynamics, protein-protein interactions, and the concentration of specific cellular ions. A fundamental challenge with using fluorescence microscopy is the presence of noise. This study introduces a novel approach to reducing noise in fluorescence microscopy images. The noise reduction problem is posed as a Maximum A Posteriori estimation problem, and solved using a novel random field model called stochastically-connected random field (SRF), which combines random graph and field theory. Experimental results using synthetic and real fluorescence microscopy data show the proposed approach achieving strong noise reduction performance when compared to several other noise reduction algorithms, using quantitative metrics. The proposed SRF approach was able to achieve strong performance in terms of signal-to-noise ratio in the synthetic results, high signal to noise ratio and contrast to noise ratio in the real fluorescence microscopy data results, and was able to maintain cell structure and subtle details while reducing background and intra-cellular noise.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.273 · 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
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

Citations50
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicImage and Signal Denoising MethodsFrench-language works237,207