MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995849093 · doi:10.1101/2019.12.11.873182

A Registration and Deep Learning Approach to Automated Landmark Detection for Geometric Morphometrics

2019· preprint· en· W2995849093 on OpenAlexaff
Jay Devine, J. David Aponte, David C. Katz, Wei Liu, Lucas Lo Vercio, Nils D. Forkert, Christopher J. Percival, Benedikt Hallgrímsson

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMorphological variations and asymmetry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLandmarkMorphometricsArtificial intelligenceImage registrationPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceComputer visionImage (mathematics)Biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Geometric morphometrics is the statistical analysis of landmark-based shape variation and its covariation with other variables. Over the past two decades, the gold standard of landmark data acquisition has been manual detection by a single observer. This approach has proven accurate and reliable in small-scale investigations. However, big data initiatives are increasingly common in biology and morphometrics. This requires fast, automated, and standardized data collection. Image registration, or the spatial alignment of images, is a fundamental technique in automatic image analysis that is well-poised for such purposes. Yet, in the few studies that have explored the utility of registration-based landmarks for geometric morphometrics, relatively high or catastrophic labelling errors around anatomical extrema are common. Such errors can result in misleading representations of the mean shape, an underestimation of biological signal, and altered variance-covariance patterns. We combine image registration with a deep and domain-specific neural network to automate and optimize anatomical landmark detection for geometric morphometrics. Using micro-computed tomography images of genetically and morphologically variable mouse skulls, we test our landmarking approach under a variety of registration conditions, including different non-linear deformation frameworks (small vs. large) and atlas strategies (single vs. multi). Compared to landmarks derived from conventional image registration workflows, our optimized landmark data show significant reductions in error at problematic locations (up to 0.63 mm), a 36.4% reduction in average landmark coordinate error, and up to a 45.1% reduction in total landmark distribution error. We achieve significant improvements in estimates of the sample mean shape and variance-covariance structure. For biological imaging datasets and morphometric research questions, our method can eliminate the time and subjectivity of manual landmark detection whilst retaining the biological integrity of these expert annotations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicMorphological variations and asymmetryFrench-language works237,207