MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393270996 · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-46986-2

Mapping cell-to-tissue graphs across human placenta histology whole slide images using deep learning with HAPPY

2024· article· en· W4393270996 on OpenAlexaff
Claudia Vanea, Jelisaveta Džigurski, Valentina Rukins, Omri Dodi, Siim Siigur, Liis Salumäe, Karen Meir, W. Tony Parks, Drorith Hochner‐Celnikier, Abigail Fraser, Hagit Hochner, Triin Laisk, Linda M. Ernst, Cecilia M. Lindgren, Christoffer Nellåker

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCommon FundNIH Office of the DirectorNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentEuropean Regional Development FundNational Institutes of HealthNational Cancer InstituteEesti TeadusagentuurNational Human Genome Research InstituteWellcome TrustNIHR Oxford Biomedical Research CentreResearch Councils UKNational Institute on Drug AbuseEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchBill and Melinda Gates FoundationLi Ka Shing FoundationWellcome
KeywordsHistologyPlacentaArtificial intelligenceSegmentationBiologyHuman placentaComputer sciencePathologyPattern recognition (psychology)MedicinePregnancyFetusGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate placenta pathology assessment is essential for managing maternal and newborn health, but the placenta's heterogeneity and temporal variability pose challenges for histology analysis. To address this issue, we developed the 'Histology Analysis Pipeline.PY' (HAPPY), a deep learning hierarchical method for quantifying the variability of cells and micro-anatomical tissue structures across placenta histology whole slide images. HAPPY differs from patch-based features or segmentation approaches by following an interpretable biological hierarchy, representing cells and cellular communities within tissues at a single-cell resolution across whole slide images. We present a set of quantitative metrics from healthy term placentas as a baseline for future assessments of placenta health and we show how these metrics deviate in placentas with clinically significant placental infarction. HAPPY's cell and tissue predictions closely replicate those from independent clinical experts and placental biology literature.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.857
Threshold uncertainty score0.957

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations33
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207