MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2543412132 · doi:10.1109/nssmic.1991.259293

Automatic neural arbor reconstruction

2002· article· en· W2543412132 on OpenAlexaff
P.M. Gregson

Bibliographic record

VenueConference Record of the 1991 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicImage Processing Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsTechnical University of Nova Scotia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPixelArtificial intelligenceOrientation (vector space)CurvatureProjection (relational algebra)Noise (video)Artificial neural networkComputer scienceDisplacement (psychology)Computer visionFeature (linguistics)Image resolutionMagnitude (astronomy)Point (geometry)Data pointMathematicsAlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)GeometryImage (mathematics)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An algorithm for detecting neural processes in serial optical sections for use in an automated three-dimensional neural reconstruction system is presented. This parsimonious, nonlinear, psychophysically motivated algorithm addresses the problems specific to neural element detection and localization, viz., images with minimal resolution, operators with small spatial supports, highly curved, filamentous features, large variation in feature intensity profile, poor signal-to-noise ratio, and determination of depth without stereo. One first finds the magnitude and orientation of the maximum intensity second directional derivative. A family of curves is locally fitted to these data, and the projections of the data on the curve family are found. If a pixel lies on a curve with sufficient total projection, it is labeled with the magnitude, orientation, curvature, spatial extent, and element displacement. Depth is interpolated from the spatial extent data for corresponding neighborhoods in three adjacent (in depth) images by using an approximation to the depth-dependent optical point spread function. Experimental results using photomicrographs of cat visual cortex are presented.>

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConference Record of the 1991 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging ConferenceSame topicImage Processing Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207