MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214536113 · doi:10.3389/fmats.2022.837006

Training Deep Neural Networks to Reconstruct Nanoporous Structures From FIB Tomography Images Using Synthetic Training Data

2022· article· en· W4214536113 on OpenAlexaff
Trushal Sardhara, Roland C. Aydin, Yong Li, Nicolas Piché, Raynald Gauvin, Christian J. Cyron, Martin Ritter

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Materials · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityObject Research Systems (Canada)
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsFocused ion beamTomographyConvolutional neural networkArtificial intelligenceMaterials scienceArtificial neural networkComputer scienceSegmentationVoxelPattern recognition (psychology)OpticsIon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Focused ion beam (FIB) tomography is a destructive technique used to collect three-dimensional (3D) structural information at a resolution of a few nanometers. For FIB tomography, a material sample is degraded by layer-wise milling. After each layer, the current surface is imaged by a scanning electron microscope (SEM), providing a consecutive series of cross-sections of the three-dimensional material sample. Especially for nanoporous materials, the reconstruction of the 3D microstructure of the material, from the information collected during FIB tomography, is impaired by the so-called shine-through effect. This effect prevents a unique mapping between voxel intensity values and material phase (e.g., solid or void). It often substantially reduces the accuracy of conventional methods for image segmentation. Here we demonstrate how machine learning can be used to tackle this problem. A bottleneck in doing so is the availability of sufficient training data. To overcome this problem, we present a novel approach to generate synthetic training data in the form of FIB-SEM images generated by Monte Carlo simulations. Based on this approach, we compare the performance of different machine learning architectures for segmenting FIB tomography data of nanoporous materials. We demonstrate that two-dimensional (2D) convolutional neural network (CNN) architectures processing a group of adjacent slices as input data as well as 3D CNN perform best and can enhance the segmentation performance significantly.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
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

Citations23
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MaterialsSame topicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207