Automatic three-dimensional reconstruction of fascicles in peripheral nerves from histological images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Computational studies can be used to support the development of peripheral nerve interfaces, but currently use simplified models of nerve anatomy, which may impact the applicability of simulation results. To better quantify and model neural anatomy across the population, we have developed an algorithm to automatically reconstruct accurate peripheral nerve models from histological cross-sections. We acquired serial median nerve cross-sections from human cadaveric samples, staining one set with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) and the other using immunohistochemistry (IHC) with anti-neurofilament antibody. We developed a four-step processing pipeline involving registration, fascicle detection, segmentation, and reconstruction. We compared the output of each step to manual ground truths, and additionally compared the final models to commonly used extrusions, via intersection-over-union (IOU). Fascicle detection and segmentation required the use of a neural network and active contours in H&E-stained images, but only simple image processing methods for IHC-stained images. Reconstruction achieved an IOU of 0.42±0.07 for H&E and 0.37±0.16 for IHC images, with errors partially attributable to global misalignment at the registration step, rather than poor reconstruction. This work provides a quantitative baseline for fully automatic construction of peripheral nerve models. Our models provided fascicular shape and branching information that would be lost via extrusion.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".