Segmentation of Tissues and Proliferating Cells in Light-Sheet Microscopy Images of Mouse Embryos Using Convolutional Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A variety of genetic mutations affect cell proliferation during organism development, leading to structural birth defects. However, the mechanisms by which these alterations influence the development of the face remain unclear. Cell proliferation and its relation to shape variation can be studied using Light-Sheet Microscopy (LSM) imaging across a range of developmental time points using mouse models. The aim of this work was to develop and evaluate accurate automatic methods based on convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for: (i) tissue segmentation (neural ectoderm and mesenchyme), (ii) cell segmentation in nuclear-stained images, and (iii) segmentation of proliferating cells in phospho-Histone H3 (pHH3)-stained LSM images of mouse embryos. For training and evaluation of the CNN models, 155 to 176 slices from 10 mouse embryo LSM images with corresponding manual segmentations were available depending on the segmentation task. Three U-net CNN models were trained optimizing their loss functions, among other hyper-parameters, depending on the segmentation task. The tissue segmentation achieved a macro-average F-score of 0.84, whereas the inter-observer value was 0.89. The cell segmentation achieved a Dice score of 0.57 and 0.56 for nuclear-stained and pHH3-stained images, respectively, whereas the corresponding inter-observer Dice scores were 0.39 and 0.45, respectively. The proposed pipeline using the U-net CNN architecture can accelerate LSM image analysis and together with the annotated datasets can serve as a reference for comparison of more advanced LSM image segmentation methods in future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".