ReSCU-Nets: Recurrent U-Nets for segmentation of three-dimensional microscopy data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Segmenting multidimensional microscopy data requires high accuracy across many images (e.g., time points or Z slices) and is thus a labor-intensive part of biological image processing pipelines. We present ReSCU-Nets, recurrent convolutional neural networks that use the segmentation results from the previous image in a sequence as a prompt to segment the current image. We demonstrate that ReSCU-Nets outperform state-of-the-art image segmentation models, including nnU-Net and the Segment Anything Model, in different segmentation tasks on time-lapse microscopy sequences. Furthermore, ReSCU-Nets enable human-in-the loop corrections that prevent propagation of segmentation errors throughout image sequences. Using ReSCU-Nets, we investigate the role of gap junctions during Drosophila embryonic wound healing. We show that pharmacological blocking of gap junctions slows down wound closure by disrupting cytoskeletal polarity and cell shape changes necessary to repair the wound. Our results demonstrate that ReSCU-Nets enable the analysis of the molecular and cellular dynamics of tissue morphogenesis from multidimensional microscopy 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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".