Improving Cryo-EM Optimization Robustness with an Optimal Transport Loss Function for Noisy Images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Many tasks in single-particle cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM), such as 2D/3D classification and homo/heterogeneous reconstruction, require optimizing model parameters to minimize the discrepancy between observed data and a forward model. The standard Mean Squared Error (MSE) loss function is computationally efficient but suffers from a non-convex rugged loss landscape, particularly for high-resolution heterogeneity inference. In this work, we investigate the practical utility of Sliced Wasserstein (SW) distances. We implement exact W 2 estimators (inverse-CDF and greedy matching) of projections alongside a computationally efficient proxy based on the L2 norm of CDFs, a formulation akin to the sliced Cramér–von Mises distance. We establish the latter as a robust, fully differentiable workhorse for the cryo-EM forward model. We evaluate its performance against the MSE in joint inference tasks recovering pose, CTF parameters, and conformational heterogeneity. Our results demonstrate that SW significantly broadens the basin of attraction, enabling robust gradient-based optimization from distant initializations where MSE fails. Using a helical spiral toy model, we highlight how SW losses are sensitive to per-particle contrast, where background noise level miscalibration can induce geometric bias in the inferred structure. We show that this bias is manageable through a joint optimization strategy that treats background contrast as a learnable parameter. Finally, we validate the approach on a synthetic dataset using the Zernike3D framework, showing that the SW loss works and yields an accurate landscape representations, comparable with MSE. These findings establish SW as a powerful tool for navigating the rugged landscapes of cryo-EM forward model parameters. Synopsis The Sliced Wasserstein loss provides a smoother optimization landscapes than mean squared error for single particle cryo-EM joint inference of pose, CTF defocus and conformational heterogeneity. Estimating background contrast is essential to avoid biasing other parameters.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".