MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205469698 · doi:10.3410/f.1123258.580400

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Robust single-particle tracking in live-cell time-lapse sequences.

2008· dataset· en· W4205469698 on OpenAlexafffund
Peter S. McPherson, Viviane Poupon

Bibliographic record

VenueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature · 2008
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersNational Institutes of HealthHelen Hay Whitney FoundationAgouron InstituteHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsTracking (education)Particle (ecology)Computer scienceSet (abstract data type)Endocytic cycleGTPaseStatistical physicsPhysicsBiologyCellCell biologyGeneticsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Single particle tracking (SPT) is often the rate-limiting step in live cell imaging studies of subcellular dynamics. Here we present a tracking algorithm that addresses the principal challenges of SPT, namely high particle density, particle motion heterogeneity, temporary particle disappearance, and particle merging and splitting. The algorithm first links particles between consecutive frames and then links the resulting track segments into complete trajectories. Both steps are formulated as global combinatorial optimization problems whose solution identifies the overall most likely set of particle trajectories throughout the movie. Using this approach, we show that the GTPase dynamin differentially affects the kinetics of long and short-lived endocytic structures, and that the motion of CD36 receptors along cytoskeleton-mediated linear tracks increases their aggregation probability. Both applications indicate the requirement for robust and complete tracking of dense particle fields to dissect the mechanisms of receptor organization at the level of the plasma membrane.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical LiteratureSame topicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207