Deep learning-enabled realistic virtual histology with ultraviolet photoacoustic remote sensing microscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The goal of oncologic surgeries is complete tumor resection, yet positive margins are frequently found postoperatively using gold standard H&E-stained histology methods. Frozen section analysis is sometimes performed for rapid intraoperative margin evaluation, albeit with known inaccuracies. Here, we introduce a label-free histological imaging method based on an ultraviolet photoacoustic remote sensing and scattering microscope, combined with unsupervised deep learning using a cycle-consistent generative adversarial network for realistic virtual staining. Unstained tissues are scanned at rates of up to 7 mins/cm 2 , at resolution equivalent to 400x digital histopathology. Quantitative validation suggests strong concordance with conventional histology in benign and malignant prostate and breast tissues. In diagnostic utility studies we demonstrate a mean sensitivity and specificity of 0.96 and 0.91 in breast specimens, and respectively 0.87 and 0.94 in prostate specimens. We also find virtual stain quality is preferred ( P = 0.03) compared to frozen section analysis in a blinded survey of pathologists.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".