Computer Vision-Assisted Data Analysis for Correlative Electron Microscopy and Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometry Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Correlative imaging is a powerful analytical approach in bioimaging, as it offers complementary information on the samples measured by different modalities. Particularly, correlative transmission electron microscopy (EM) and nanoscale secondary ion mass spectrometry (NanoSIMS) imaging enable high-resolution morphological and chemical analysis at the subcellular level. However, manual segmentation and correlation of regions of interest (ROIs) in large EM and NanoSIMS data sets are time-consuming, prone to user bias, and limited in throughput. To address this, we developed a computer vision-assisted image analysis pipeline for automatic classification and segmentation of subcellular organelles in EM images, enabling rapid and reproducible correlation with NanoSIMS ion data. Using human neuronal progenitor cells (hNPCs) and differentiated postmitotic neurons, we trained a YOLOv8 deep learning model to recognize six major organelle types. The pipeline included EM image preprocessing, segmentation via YOLOv8, morphological filtering, and image registration with NanoSIMS ion maps. Performance evaluation demonstrated a robust model accuracy. We applied the pipeline to measure 15 N-leucine abundance to study protein turnover in single organelles across different cell states. Results showed distinct turnover dynamics among organelles, with slower turnover observed in differentiated neurons compared to hNPCs. The automated pipeline significantly reduced the analysis time (from hours to minutes) while maintaining consistency with manual segmentation. Our approach demonstrates how computer vision can streamline correlative imaging workflows, improve data quality, and enable deeper insights into subcellular processes such as protein turnover, making it especially valuable for SIMS users and broader bioimaging applications.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".