MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3217126935 · doi:10.1093/bioadv/vbab032

An expectation–maximization approach to quantifying protein stoichiometry with single-molecule imaging

2021· article· en· W3217126935 on OpenAlexaff
Artittaya Boonkird, Daniel Nino, Joshua N. Milstein

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinformatics Advances · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePython (programming language)PhotobleachingMaximizationRendering (computer graphics)Benchmark (surveying)Single-molecule experimentSoftwareAlgorithmResamplingBiological systemArtificial intelligenceFluorescencePhysicsMathematicsOpticsMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivation: Single-molecule localization microscopy (SMLM) is a super-resolution technique capable of rendering nanometer scale images of cellular structures. Recently, much effort has gone into developing algorithms for extracting quantitative features from SMLM datasets, such as the abundance and stoichiometry of macromolecular complexes. These algorithms often require knowledge of the complicated photophysical properties of photoswitchable fluorophores. Results: Here, we develop a calibration-free approach to quantitative SMLM built upon the observation that most photoswitchable fluorophores emit a geometrically distributed number of blinks before photobleaching. From a statistical model of a mixture of monomers, dimers and trimers, the method employs an adapted expectation-maximization algorithm to learn the protomer fractions while simultaneously determining the single-fluorophore blinking distribution. To illustrate the utility of our approach, we benchmark it on both simulated datasets and experimental datasets assembled from SMLM images of fluorescently labeled DNA nanostructures. Availability and implementation: An implementation of our algorithm written in Python is available at: https://www.utm.utoronto.ca/milsteinlab/resources/Software/MMCode/. Supplementary information: online.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinformatics AdvancesSame topicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207