Classification of T lymphocyte motility behaviors using a machine learning approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
T lymphocytes migrate into organs and interact with local cells to perform their functions. How human T lymphocytes communicate with organ-specific cells and participate in pathobiological processes remains unresolved. Brain infiltration of T lymphocytes is associated with multiple neurological disorders. Thus, to characterize the behavior of human T lymphocytes reaching the human brain, we performed time-lapse microscopy on human CD8+ T lymphocytes co-cultured with either primary human astrocytes or neurons. Using traditional manual and visual assessment of microscopy data, we identified distinct CD8+ T lymphocyte motility behaviors. However, such characterization is time and labor-intensive. In this work, we trained and validated a machine-learning model for the automated classification of behaviors of CD8+ T lymphocytes interacting with astrocytes and neurons. A balanced random forest was trained for the binary classification of established classes of cell behaviors (synapse vs. kinapse) as well as visually identified behaviors (scanning, dancing, and poking). Feature selection was performed during 3-fold cross-validation using the minimum redundancy maximum relevance algorithm. Results show promising performances when tested on a held-out dataset of CD8+ T lymphocytes interacting with astrocytes with a new experimenter and a held-out independent dataset of CD8+ T lymphocytes interacting with neurons. When tested on the independent CD8+ T cell-neuron dataset, the final model achieved a binary classification accuracy of 0.82 and a 3-class accuracy of 0.79. This novel automated classification approach could significantly reduce the time required to label cell motility behaviors while facilitating the identification of interactions of T lymphocytes with multiple cell types.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".