flowLearn: fast and precise identification and quality checking of cell populations in flow cytometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motivation: Identification of cell populations in flow cytometry is a critical part of the analysis and lays the groundwork for many applications and research discovery. The current paradigm of manual analysis is time consuming and subjective. A common goal of users is to replace manual analysis with automated methods that replicate their results. Supervised tools provide the best performance in such a use case, however they require fine parameterization to obtain the best results. Hence, there is a strong need for methods that are fast to setup, accurate and interpretable. Results: flowLearn is a semi-supervised approach for the quality-checked identification of cell populations. Using a very small number of manually gated samples, through density alignments it is able to predict gates on other samples with high accuracy and speed. On two state-of-the-art datasets, our tool achieves median(F1)-measures exceeding 0.99 for 31%, and 0.90 for 80% of all analyzed populations. Furthermore, users can directly interpret and adjust automated gates on new sample files to iteratively improve the initial training. Availability and implementation: FlowLearn is available as an R package on https://github.com/mlux86/flowLearn. Evaluation data is publicly available online. Details can be found in the Supplementary Material. 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 | 0.015 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.020 |
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".