MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387581041 · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-42055-2

Shadow imaging for panoptical visualization of brain tissue in vivo

2023· article· en· W4387581041 on OpenAlexafffund
Yulia Dembitskaya, Andrew K. J. Boyce, Agata Idziak, Atefeh Pourkhalili Langeroudi, Misa Arizono, Jordan Girard, Guillaume Le Bourdellès, Mathieu Ducros, Marie Sato-Fitoussi, Amaia Otxoa-de-Amezaga, Kristell Oizel, Stéphane Bancelin, Luc Mercier, Thomas Pfeiffer, Roger Thompson, Sun Kwang Kim, Andréas Bikfalvi, U. Valentin Nägerl

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
FundersFédération pour la Recherche sur le CerveauNational Research Foundation of KoreaAgence Nationale de la RechercheAlberta InnovatesNational Research Foundation
KeywordsMicroscopyTwo-photon excitation microscopyConfocal microscopyMagnetic resonance imagingFluorescence microscopeIn vivoFluorescence-lifetime imaging microscopyBrain tissuePreclinical imagingNeurosciencePathologyBiologyBiomedical engineeringFluorescenceCell biologyMedicinePhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Progress in neuroscience research hinges on technical advances in visualizing living brain tissue with high fidelity and facility. Current neuroanatomical imaging approaches either require tissue fixation (electron microscopy), do not have cellular resolution (magnetic resonance imaging) or only give a fragmented view (fluorescence microscopy). Here, we show how regular light microscopy together with fluorescence labeling of the interstitial fluid in the extracellular space provide comprehensive optical access in real-time to the anatomical complexity and dynamics of living brain tissue at submicron scale. Using several common fluorescence microscopy modalities (confocal, light-sheet and 2-photon microscopy) in mouse organotypic and acute brain slices and the intact mouse brain in vivo, we demonstrate the value of this straightforward 'shadow imaging' approach by revealing neurons, microglia, tumor cells and blood capillaries together with their complete anatomical tissue contexts. In addition, we provide quantifications of perivascular spaces and the volume fraction of the extracellular space of brain tissue in vivo.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.408 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations19
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207