MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317433741 · doi:10.1007/s12551-022-01041-6

Second harmonic generation microscopy: a powerful tool for bio-imaging

2023· review· en· W4317433741 on OpenAlexafffund
Arash Aghigh, Stéphane Bancelin, Maxime Rivard, Maxime Pinsard, Heide Ibrahim, François Légaré

Bibliographic record

VenueBiophysical Reviews · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsMicroscopySecond-harmonic generationNanotechnologySecond-harmonic imaging microscopyPerspective (graphical)Optical imagingComputer scienceNeuroscienceMaterials scienceOpticsPhysicsArtificial intelligenceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Second harmonic generation (SHG) microscopy is an important optical imaging technique in a variety of applications. This article describes the history and physical principles of SHG microscopy and its more advanced variants, as well as their strengths and weaknesses in biomedical applications. It also provides an overview of SHG and advanced SHG imaging in neuroscience and microtubule imaging and how these methods can aid in understanding microtubule formation, structuration, and involvement in neuronal function. Finally, we offer a perspective on the future of these methods and how technological advancements can help make SHG microscopy a more widely adopted imaging technique.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.004

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations140
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiophysical ReviewsSame topicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207