MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402621348 · doi:10.1093/aobpla/plae046

Automated seminal root angle measurement with corrective annotation

2024· article· en· W4402621348 on OpenAlexaff
Abraham George Smith, Marta Malinowska, Anja Karine Ruud, Luc Janss, Lene Krusell, Jens Due Jensen, Torben Asp

Bibliographic record

VenueAoB Plants · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolism
Canadian institutionsNordic Life Science Pipeline (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipeline (software)BiologyPearson product-moment correlation coefficientRoot (linguistics)AnnotationCorrelation coefficientSegmentationCorrelationArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceStatisticsBioinformaticsMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measuring seminal root angle is an important aspect of root phenotyping, yet automated methods are lacking. We introduce SeminalRootAngle, a novel open-source automated method that measures seminal root angles from images. To ensure our method is flexible and user-friendly we build on an established corrective annotation training method for image segmentation. We tested SeminalRootAngle on a heterogeneous dataset of 662 spring barley rhizobox images, which presented challenges in terms of image clarity and root obstruction. Validation of our new automated pipeline against manual measurements yielded a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.71. We also measure inter-annotator agreement, obtaining a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.68, indicating that our new pipeline provides similar root angle measurement accuracy to manual approaches. We use our new SeminalRootAngle tool to identify single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) significantly associated with angle and length, shedding light on the genetic basis of root architecture.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAoB PlantsSame topicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolismFrench-language works237,207