MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204210642 · doi:10.1101/2021.09.27.460959

OnePetri: accelerating common bacteriophage Petri dish assays with computer vision

2021· preprint· en· W3204210642 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael Shamash, Corinne F. Maurice

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAbbVie CanadaHoward Hughes Medical Institute
KeywordsPetri dishEnumerationBacteriophageComputer sciencePetri netArtificial intelligenceMathematicsAlgorithmDiscrete mathematicsBiologyMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Bacteriophage plaque enumeration is a critical step in a wide array of protocols. The current gold standard for plaque enumeration on Petri dishes is through manual counting. This approach is time-intensive, has low-throughput, is limited to Petri dishes which have a countable number of plaques, and can have variable results upon recount due to human error. Methods We present OnePetri, a collection of trained machine learning models and open-source mobile application for the rapid enumeration of bacteriophage plaques on circular Petri dishes. Results When compared against the current gold standard of manual counting, OnePetri was significantly faster, with minimal error. Compared against two other similar tools, Plaque Size Tool and CFU.AI, OnePetri had higher plaque recall and reduced detection times on most test images. Conclusions The OnePetri application can rapidly enumerate phage plaques on circular Petri dishes with high precision and recall.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.006

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.220 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207