Learning unsupervised feature representations for single cell microscopy images with paired cell inpainting
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cellular microscopy images contain rich insights about biology. To extract this information, researchers use features, or measurements of the patterns of interest in the images. Here, we introduce a convolutional neural network (CNN) to automatically design features for fluorescence microscopy. We use a self-supervised method to learn feature representations of single cells in microscopy images without labelled training data. We train CNNs on a simple task that leverages the inherent structure of microscopy images and controls for variation in cell morphology and imaging: given one cell from an image, the CNN is asked to predict the fluorescence pattern in a second different cell from the same image. We show that our method learns high-quality features that describe protein expression patterns in single cells both yeast and human microscopy datasets. Moreover, we demonstrate that our features are useful for exploratory biological analysis, by capturing high-resolution cellular components in a proteome-wide cluster analysis of human proteins, and by quantifying multi-localized proteins and single-cell variability. We believe paired cell inpainting is a generalizable method to obtain feature representations of single cells in multichannel microscopy images.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it