Correcting Non-Uniform Milling in FIB-SEM Images with Unsupervised Cross-Plane Image-to-Image Translation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motivation: Focused Ion Beam Scanning Electron Microscopy (FIB-SEM) is an advanced Volume Electron Microscopy technology with growing applications, featuring thinner sectioning compared to other Volume Electron Microscopes. Such axial resolution is crucial for accurate segmentation and reconstruction of fine structures in biological tissues. However, in reality, the milling thickness is not always uniform across the sample surface, resulting in the axial plane looking distorted. Existing image processing approaches often: (i) assume constant section thickness; (ii) consist of multiple separate processing steps (i.e., not in an end-to-end fashion); (iii) require ground truth images for modeling, which may entail significant labor and be unsuitable for rapid analysis. Results: We develop a deep learning method to correct non-uniform milling artifacts observed in FIB-SEM images. The proposed method is an image-to-image translation technique that can mitigate image distortions in an unsupervised manner. It conducts cross-plane learning within 3D image volumes without any ground truth annotations. We demonstrate the efficacy of our method on a real-world micro-wasp dataset, showcasing significantly improved image quality after correction with qualitative and quantitative analysis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".