MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310964503 · doi:10.3791/64435

Deep Learning-Based Segmentation of Cryo-Electron Tomograms

2022· article· en· W4310964503 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica Heebner, Carson Purnell, Ryan Hylton, Mike Marsh, Michael A. Grillo, Matthew T. Swulius

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Electron Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsObject Research Systems (Canada)
FundersPennsylvania State UniversityUniversity of PennsylvaniaPenn State College of MedicinePennsylvania Department of Health
KeywordsSegmentationArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkPreprocessorContext (archaeology)Deep learningCryo-electron tomographyTomographyElectron tomographyPattern recognition (psychology)TracingComputer visionImage segmentationElectron microscopeOpticsPhysicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cryo-electron tomography (cryo-ET) allows researchers to image cells in their native, hydrated state at the highest resolution currently possible. The technique has several limitations, however, that make analyzing the data it generates time-intensive and difficult. Hand segmenting a single tomogram can take from hours to days, but a microscope can easily generate 50 or more tomograms a day. Current deep learning segmentation programs for cryo-ET do exist, but are limited to segmenting one structure at a time. Here, multi-slice U-Net convolutional neural networks are trained and applied to automatically segment multiple structures simultaneously within cryo-tomograms. With proper preprocessing, these networks can be robustly inferred to many tomograms without the need for training individual networks for each tomogram. This workflow dramatically improves the speed with which cryo-electron tomograms can be analyzed by cutting segmentation time down to under 30 min in most cases. Further, segmentations can be used to improve the accuracy of filament tracing within a cellular context and to rapidly extract coordinates for subtomogram averaging.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
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)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.421 · 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

Citations53
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicAdvanced Electron Microscopy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207