MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362576897 · doi:10.1364/boe.487087

Nonlinear microscopy and deep learning classification for mammary glandmicroenvironment studies

2023· article· en· W4362576897 on OpenAlexafffund
Arash Aghigh, Samuel E.J. Preston, Gaëtan Jargot, Heide Ibrahim, Sonia V. del Rincón, François Légaré

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Optics Express · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationCanadian Cancer Society
KeywordsSecond-harmonic generationExtracellular matrixMicroscopyArtificial intelligenceDeep learningTumor microenvironmentBenchmark (surveying)Mammary tumorComputer scienceMammary glandPathologyBiomedical engineeringMaterials scienceCancerBiologyOpticsMedicineCell biologyPhysicsInternal medicineBreast cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tumors, their microenvironment, and the mechanisms by which collagen morphology changes throughout cancer progression have recently been a topic of interest. Second harmonic generation (SHG) and polarization second harmonic (P-SHG) microscopy are label-free, hallmark methods that can highlight this alteration in the extracellular matrix (ECM). This article uses automated sample scanning SHG and P-SHG microscopy to investigate ECM deposition associated with tumors residing in the mammary gland. We show two different analysis approaches using the acquired images to distinguish collagen fibrillar orientation changes in the ECM. Lastly, we apply a supervised deep-learning model to classify naïve and tumor-bearing mammary gland SHG images. We benchmark the trained model using transfer learning with the well-known MobileNetV2 architecture. By fine-tuning the different parameters of these models, we show a trained deep-learning model that suits such a small dataset with 73% accuracy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.294 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedical Optics ExpressSame topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207