MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390542568 · doi:10.3389/fcell.2023.1327994

Quantifying cytoskeletal organization from optical microscopy data

2024· article· en· W4390542568 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarah J. DesRoches, Andrew R. Harris

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCytoskeletonActinActin cytoskeletonBiological systemMetric (unit)Computer scienceBiologyComputational biologyCell biologyCellBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The actin cytoskeleton plays a pivotal role in a broad range of physiological processes including directing cell shape and subcellular organization, determining cell mechanical properties, and sensing and transducing mechanical forces. The versatility of the actin cytoskeleton arises from the ability of actin filaments to assemble into higher order structures through their interaction with a vast set of regulatory proteins. Actin filaments assemble into bundles, meshes, and networks, where different combinations of these structures fulfill specific functional roles. Analyzing the organization and abundance of different actin structures from optical microscopy data provides a valuable metric for assessing cell physiological function and changes associated with disease. However, quantitative measurements of the size, abundance, orientation, and distribution of different types of actin structure remains challenging both from an experimental and image analysis perspective. In this review, we summarize image analysis methods for extracting quantitative values that can be used for characterizing the organization of actin structures and provide selected examples. We summarize the potential sample types and metric reported with different approaches as a guide for selecting an image analysis strategy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Cell and Developmental BiologySame topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207