MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3160785747 · doi:10.1364/boe.424357

Integration of light scattering with machine learning for label free cell detection

2021· article· en· W3160785747 on OpenAlexafffund
Wendy Yu Wan, Lina Liu, Xiaoxuan Liu, Wei Wang, Md. Zahurul Islam, Chun‐Hua Dong, Craig R. Garen, Michael T. Woodside, Manisha Gupta, Mrinal Mandal, W. Rozmus, Ying Y. Tsui

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Optics Express · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsScatteringLight scatteringStaurosporineComputer scienceOpticsArtificial intelligenceBiological systemPhysicsBiologyNuclear magnetic resonance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Light scattering has been used for label-free cell detection. The angular light scattering patterns from the cells are unique to them based on the cell size, nucleus size, number of mitochondria, and cell surface roughness. The patterns collected from the cells can then be classified based on different image characteristics. We have also developed a machine learning (ML) method to classify these cell light scattering patterns. As a case study we have used this light scattering technique integrated with the machine learning to analyze staurosporine-treated SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cells and compare them to non-treated control cells. Experimental results show that the ML technique can provide a classification accuracy (treated versus non-treated) of over 90%. The predicted percentage of the treated cells in a mixed solution is within 5% of the reference (ground-truth) value and the technique has the potential to be a viable method for real-time detection and diagnosis.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 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

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedical Optics ExpressSame topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207