Automated measurement of cardiomyocyte monolayer contraction using the Exeter Multiscope
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT We apply a novel microscope architecture, the Exeter Multiscope, to the problem of acquiring image data in rapid succession from nine wells of a 96 well plate. We demonstrate that the new microscope can detect contraction in cardiomyocyte monolayers which have been plated into these wells. Each well is sampled using 500 × 500 pixels across a 1.4 × 1.4 mm field of view, acquired in three colours at 3.7 Hz per well. The use of multiple illumination wavelengths provides post-hoc focus selection, further increasing the level of automation. The performance of the Exeter Multiscope is benchmarked against industry standard methods using a commercial microscope with a motorised stage and demonstrates that the Multiscope can acquire data almost 40 times faster. The data from both Multiscope and the commercial systems are processed by a ‘pixel variance’ algorithm that uses information from the pixel value variability over time to determine the timing and amplitude of tissue contraction. This algorithm is also benchmarked against an existing algorithm that employs an absolute difference measure of tissue contraction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".