MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409504693 · doi:10.1186/s12938-025-01375-8

Video microscopy: an old story with a bright biological future

2025· review· en· W4409504693 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBioMedical Engineering OnLine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Fluorescence Microscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMicroscopyComputer scienceMaterials scienceComputer graphics (images)NanotechnologyOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Single-cell analysis is increasingly popular in the field of biology, enabling more precise analyses of heterogeneous phenomena, particularly in the fields of embryology and the study of different diseases. At the heart of this evolution is video microscopy, an ancient but revolutionary technique. From its first use on embryos, through the study of C. Elegans, with the development of algorithms for its automation, the history of video microscopy has been fascinating. Unfortunately, many unresolved issues remain, such as the sheer volume of data produced and the quality of the images taken. The aim of this review is to explore the past, present and future of this technique, which could become indispensable in recent decades, to understand cell fate and how diseases affect their destiny.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.306 · 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