AnNoBrainer, an Automated Annotation of Mouse Brain Images using Deep Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Annotation of multiple regions of interest across the whole mouse brain is an indispensable process for quantitative evaluation of a multitude of study endpoints in neuroscience digital pathology. Prior experience and domain expert knowledge are the key aspects for image annotation quality and consistency. At present, image annotation is often achieved manually by certified pathologists or trained technicians, limiting the total throughput of studies performed at neuroscience digital pathology labs. It may also mean that less rigorous, less time-consuming methods of histopathological assessment are employed by non-pathologists, especially for early discovery and preclinical studies. To address these limitations and to meet the growing demand for image analysis in a pharmaceutical setting, we developed AnNoBrainer, an open-source software tool that leverages deep learning, image registration, and standard cortical brain templates to automatically annotate individual brain regions on 2D pathology slides. Application of AnNoBrainer to a published set of pathology slides from transgenic mice models of synucleinopathy revealed comparable accuracy, increased reproducibility, and a significant reduction (∼50%) in time spent on brain annotation, quality control and labelling compared to trained scientists in pathology. Taken together, AnNoBrainer offers a rapid, accurate, and reproducible automated annotation of mouse brain images that largely meets the experts’ histopathological assessment standards (>85% of cases) and enables high-throughput image analysis workflows in digital pathology labs.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.005 |
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".