Comparing three-dimensional serial optical coherence tomography histology to MRI imaging in the entire mouse brain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An automated serial histology setup combining optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging with vibratome sectioning was used to image eight wild type mouse brains. The datasets resulted in thousands of volumetric tiles resolved at a voxel size of (4.9×4.9×6.5) μm3 stitched back together to give a three-dimensional map of the brain from which a template OCT brain was obtained. To assess deformation caused by tissue sectioning, reconstruction algorithms, and fixation, OCT datasets were compared to both in vivo and ex vivo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) imaging. The OCT brain template yielded a highly detailed map of the brain structure, with a high contrast in white matter fiber bundles and was highly resemblant to the in vivo MRI template. Brain labeling using the Allen brain framework showed little variation in regional brain volume among imaging modalities with no statistical differences. The high correspondence between the OCT template brain and its in vivo counterpart demonstrates the potential of whole brain histology to validate in vivo imaging.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".