MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deep Learning Applications in Microscopy and Holography for near-field Signal Processing

2024· article· en· W4399529208 on OpenAlexaff
Milad Mohseni, K T Thilagham, K Aravinda, B Santhosh Kumar, Amandeep Nagpal, B. T. Geetha

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Circuits and Semiconductor Failure Analysis
Canadian institutionsHorizon College and Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHolographyMicroscopyDigital holographic microscopySignal processingField (mathematics)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceOpticsDigital signal processingPhysicsComputer hardware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Focusing on near-field signal processing, we provide a novel and comprehensive strategy for improving picture quality, obtaining super-resolution, and performing quantitative analysis in the disciplines of microscopy and holography. Three deep learning algorithms—Enhanced ImageNet (EINet), HoloReconGAN, and QuantSegNet—are combined in this method to maximize their potential. In order to improve images, super-resolve them, and analyze them quantitatively, many algorithms have been developed. In order to better comprehend each method, mathematical equations are provided to describe the main steps involved. With the use of convolutional neural networks, noise is reduced and finer features are brought into focus with the help of the Enhanced ImageNet (EINet) method. To accomplish super-resolution and 3D reconstruction from holographic data, HoloReconGAN combines generative adversarial networks (GANs) with variational autoencoders (VAEs). Label-free segmentation and quantitative analysis of structures in microscopy and holography pictures are the focus of QuantSegNet, a semantic segmentation network. Our suggested technique has been shown to outperform six established methods over a broad variety of assessment criteria. Image quality, noise suppression, feature recognition, computational efficiency, and resilience are just few of the areas where it shines. It's also faster, uses less memory, is more accurate, easier to use, cheaper, and faster. Applications in several scientific fields might be facilitated, and the area of microscopy and holography as a whole could see significant advancements as a result.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score0.279

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIntegrated Circuits and Semiconductor Failure AnalysisFrench-language works237,207