A weak-labelling and deep learning approach for in-focus object segmentation in 3D widefield microscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three-dimensional information is crucial to our understanding of biological phenomena. The vast majority of biological microscopy specimens are inherently three-dimensional. However, conventional light microscopy is largely geared towards 2D images, while 3D microscopy and image reconstruction remain feasible only with specialised equipment and techniques. Inspired by the working principles of one such technique-confocal microscopy, we propose a novel approach to 3D widefield microscopy reconstruction through semantic segmentation of in-focus and out-of-focus pixels. For this, we explore a number of rule-based algorithms commonly used for software-based autofocusing and apply them to a dataset of widefield focal stacks. We propose a computation scheme allowing the calculation of lateral focus score maps of the slices of each stack using these algorithms. Furthermore, we identify algorithms preferable for obtaining such maps. Finally, to ensure the practicality of our approach, we propose a surrogate model based on a deep neural network, capable of segmenting in-focus pixels from the out-of-focus background in a fast and reliable fashion. The deep-neural-network-based approach allows a major speedup for data processing making it usable for online data processing.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".