Development of high-throughput systems for biodosimetry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biomarkers for ionising radiation exposure have great utility in scenarios where there has been a potential exposure and physical dosimetry is missing or in dispute, such as for occupational and accidental exposures. Biomarkers that respond as a function of dose are particularly useful as biodosemeters to determine the dose of radiation to which an individual has been exposed. These dose measurements can also be used in medical scenarios to track doses from medical exposures and even have the potential to identify an individual's response to radiation exposure that could help tailor treatments. The measurement of biomarkers of exposure in medicine and for accidents, where a larger number of samples would be required, is limited by the throughput of analysis (i.e. the number of samples that could be processed and analysed), particularly for microscope-based methods, which tend to be labour-intensive. Rapid analysis in an emergency scenario, such as a large-scale accident, would provide dose estimates to medical practitioners, allowing timely administration of the appropriate medical countermeasures to help mitigate the effects of radiation exposure. In order to improve sample throughput for biomarker analysis, much effort has been devoted to automating the process from sample preparation through automated image analysis. This paper will focus mainly on biological endpoints traditionally analysed by microscopy, specifically dicentric chromosomes, micronuclei and gamma-H2AX. These endpoints provide examples where sample throughput has been improved through automated image acquisition, analysis of images acquired by microscopy, as well as methods that have been developed for analysis using imaging flow cytometry.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.009 |
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".