MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406700413 · doi:10.1101/2025.01.20.633744

A self-supervised deep learning pipeline for segmentation in two-photon fluorescence microscopy

2025· preprint· en· W4406700413 on OpenAlexafffund
Emmanuel E. Ntiri, Tony Xu, Matthew Rozak, Ahmadreza Attarpour, Adrienne Dorr, Bojana Stefanovic, Maged Goubran

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlliance de recherche numérique du CanadaUniversity of TorontoNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsPipeline (software)SegmentationFluorescenceMicroscopyArtificial intelligenceFluorescence microscopeDeep learningComputer scienceTwo-photon excitation microscopyMaterials sciencePattern recognition (psychology)PhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Two-photon fluorescence microscopy (TPFM) allows in situ investigation of the structure and function of the brain at a cellular level, but the conventional image analyses of TPFM data are labour-intensive. Automated deep learning (DL)-based image processing pipelines used to analyze TPFM data require large labeled training datasets. Here, we developed a self supervised learning (SSL) pipeline to test whether unlabeled data can be used to boost the accuracy and generalizability of DL models for image segmentation in TPFM. We specifically developed four pretext tasks, including shuffling, rotation, axis rotation, and reconstruction, to train models without supervision using the UNet architecture. We validated our pipeline on two tasks (neuronal soma and vasculature segmentation), using large 3D microscopy datasets. We introduced a novel density-based metric, which provided more sensitive evaluation to downstream analysis tasks. We further determined the amount of labeled data required to reach performance on par with fully supervised learning (FSL) models. SSL-based models that were fine-tuned with only 50% of data were on par or superior (e.g., Dice increase of 3% for neuron segmentation and Dice score of 0.88 ± 0.09 for vessel segmentation) to FSL models. We demonstrated that segmentation maps generated by SSL models pretrained on the reconstruction and rotation tasks can be better translated to downstream tasks than can other SSL tasks. Finally, we benchmarked all models on a publicly available out-of-distribution dataset, demonstrating that SSL models outperform FSL when trained with clean data, and are more robust than FSL models when trained with noisy data.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.257 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207