MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040131329 · doi:10.1017/s1431927600036576

Cell Boundary Detection and Volume Approximation of Confocal Microscope Images for Bioinformatics

2000· article· en· W3040131329 on OpenAlexaff
Cybelle Fernandez, Damiaan F. Habets, Stefan C. Kremer, Marc Le Maguer

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroscopy and Microanalysis · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlasmolysisOsmotic dehydrationProtoplastTonicityCytoplasmDehydrationConfocal microscopyConfocalBiological systemMicroscopeComputer scienceBiophysicsMicroscopyChemistryProcess (computing)Materials scienceCell wallCell biologyBiologyBiochemistryOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Bioinformatics is the science of developing computer databases and algorithms for the purpose of speeding up and enhancing biological research. This paper will detail the application of a three-dimensional cell boundary detection algorithm to compute the volumes of osmotically dehydrated apple cells in an effort to better understand the effects of this treatment. Osmotic dehydration is an efficient pre-treatment technique in food processing. However, the changes that occur in the food material at the cellular level have not been thoroughly understood and this has limited the full industrial application of the process. During osmotic dehydration, plant tissues when placed in hypertonic solutions undergo plasmolysis that can be directly observed under light microscopy. The usual phenomenon observed during plasmolysis is the separation of the cytoplasm from the cell wall, due to the removal of water from the protoplast (Frey-Wyssling and Muhlethaler, 1965). Although readily observed under the microscope, however, the quantitative changes that occur during the process are not easily measurable.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicroscopy and MicroanalysisSame topicSpectroscopy and Chemometric AnalysesFrench-language works237,207