MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407247922 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2025.3532886

Automation and Control of Embryo Trophectoderm Cell Biopsy at the Blastocyst Stage

2025· article· en· W4407247922 on OpenAlexafffund
Ihab Abu Ajamieh, Mohammad Al Saaideh, Mohammad Al Janaideh, James K. Mills

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of GuelphMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBlastocystEmbryoAndrologyAutomationBiologyGynecologyEmbryogenesisCell biologyMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop and validate a vision-based automation framework for performing trophectoderm (TE) cell biopsy on mouse embryos. METHOD: The proposed framework leverages widely available tools in research laboratories and In-Vitro fertilization (IVF) clinics, combined with computer vision and image-based control algorithms. A computer vision system first estimates the embryo's orientation to enable precise reorientation for zona pellucida (ZP) laser perforation. A vision-feedback control system then guides the embryo to the targeted perforation location and determines optimal laser parameters for ZP perforation. A vision-guided vacuum system aspirates the TE cells, with a multi-pulse laser ensuring their separation. RESULTS: Experimental validation using mouse blastocyst embryos demonstrated the feasibility and reliability of the proposed automation method. The vision-based approach achieved accurate orientation, controlled ZP perforation, and successful isolation of TE cells, effectively replicating manual biopsy techniques performed by skilled embryologists. CONCLUSION: The study presents a robust framework for automating embryo TE biopsy, reducing variability, and enhancing procedural precision. Integrating computer vision and control algorithms allows for consistent and reproducible results. SIGNIFICANCE: By utilizing existing infrastructure, the proposed method offers a cost-effective and scalable solution for single-cell research and IVF clinics, advancing genetic testing and reproductive medicine.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

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 head0.231
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 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 venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207