Literature DB >> 33074102

On the objectivity, reliability, and validity of deep learning enabled bioimage analyses.

Dennis Segebarth1, Matthias Griebel2, Christoph M Flath2, Robert Blum1,3, Nikolai Stein2, Cora R von Collenberg1, Corinna Martin1, Dominik Fiedler4, Lucas B Comeras5, Anupam Sah6, Victoria Schoeffler7, Teresa Lüffe7, Alexander Dürr2, Rohini Gupta1, Manju Sasi1, Christina Lillesaar7, Maren D Lange4, Ramon O Tasan5, Nicolas Singewald6, Hans-Christian Pape4.   

Abstract

Bioimage analysis of fluorescent labels is widely used in the life sciences. Recent advances in deep learning (DL) allow automating time-consuming manual image analysis processes based on annotated training data. However, manual annotation of fluorescent features with a low signal-to-noise ratio is somewhat subjective. Training DL models on subjective annotations may be instable or yield biased models. In turn, these models may be unable to reliably detect biological effects. An analysis pipeline integrating data annotation, ground truth estimation, and model training can mitigate this risk. To evaluate this integrated process, we compared different DL-based analysis approaches. With data from two model organisms (mice, zebrafish) and five laboratories, we show that ground truth estimation from multiple human annotators helps to establish objectivity in fluorescent feature annotations. Furthermore, ensembles of multiple models trained on the estimated ground truth establish reliability and validity. Our research provides guidelines for reproducible DL-based bioimage analyses.
© 2020, Segebarth et al.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bioimage informatics; computational biology; deep learning; fluorescence microscopy; mouse; neuroscience; objectivity; reproducibility; systems biology; validity; zebrafish

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33074102      PMCID: PMC7710359          DOI: 10.7554/eLife.59780

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Elife        ISSN: 2050-084X            Impact factor:   8.140


  53 in total

1.  In Silico Labeling: Predicting Fluorescent Labels in Unlabeled Images.

Authors:  Eric M Christiansen; Samuel J Yang; D Michael Ando; Ashkan Javaherian; Gaia Skibinski; Scott Lipnick; Elliot Mount; Alison O'Neil; Kevan Shah; Alicia K Lee; Piyush Goyal; William Fedus; Ryan Poplin; Andre Esteva; Marc Berndl; Lee L Rubin; Philip Nelson; Steven Finkbeiner
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2018-04-12       Impact factor: 41.582

2.  scikit-image: image processing in Python.

Authors:  Stéfan van der Walt; Johannes L Schönberger; Juan Nunez-Iglesias; François Boulogne; Joshua D Warner; Neil Yager; Emmanuelle Gouillart; Tony Yu
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2014-06-19       Impact factor: 2.984

3.  Imagining the future of bioimage analysis.

Authors:  Erik Meijering; Anne E Carpenter; Hanchuan Peng; Fred A Hamprecht; Jean-Christophe Olivo-Marin
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2016-12-07       Impact factor: 54.908

4.  Opinion: Is science really facing a reproducibility crisis, and do we need it to?

Authors:  Daniele Fanelli
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Sex Differences in Context Fear Generalization and Recruitment of Hippocampus and Amygdala during Retrieval.

Authors:  Ashley A Keiser; Lacie M Turnbull; Mara A Darian; Dana E Feldman; Iris Song; Natalie C Tronson
Journal:  Neuropsychopharmacology       Date:  2016-08-31       Impact factor: 7.853

6.  Cytoarchitectonic and chemoarchitectonic characterization of the prefrontal cortical areas in the mouse.

Authors:  H J J M Van De Werd; G Rajkowska; P Evers; Harry B M Uylings
Journal:  Brain Struct Funct       Date:  2010-03-12       Impact factor: 3.270

7.  Prefrontal single-unit firing associated with deficient extinction in mice.

Authors:  Paul J Fitzgerald; Nigel Whittle; Shaun M Flynn; Carolyn Graybeal; Courtney R Pinard; Ozge Gunduz-Cinar; Alexxai V Kravitz; Nicolas Singewald; Andrew Holmes
Journal:  Neurobiol Learn Mem       Date:  2013-11-11       Impact factor: 2.877

8.  aMAP is a validated pipeline for registration and segmentation of high-resolution mouse brain data.

Authors:  Christian J Niedworok; Alexander P Y Brown; M Jorge Cardoso; Pavel Osten; Sebastien Ourselin; Marc Modat; Troy W Margrie
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2016-07-07       Impact factor: 14.919

9.  Enhancing dopaminergic signaling and histone acetylation promotes long-term rescue of deficient fear extinction.

Authors:  N Whittle; V Maurer; C Murphy; J Rainer; D Bindreither; M Hauschild; A Scharinger; M Oberhauser; T Keil; C Brehm; T Valovka; J Striessnig; N Singewald
Journal:  Transl Psychiatry       Date:  2016-12-06       Impact factor: 6.222

10.  Sexually divergent expression of active and passive conditioned fear responses in rats.

Authors:  Tina M Gruene; Katelyn Flick; Alexis Stefano; Stephen D Shea; Rebecca M Shansky
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2015-11-14       Impact factor: 8.140

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Bioimage Analysis and Cell Motility.

Authors:  Aleix Boquet-Pujadas; Jean-Christophe Olivo-Marin; Nancy Guillén
Journal:  Patterns (N Y)       Date:  2021-01-08

2.  Tackling the challenges of bioimage analysis.

Authors:  Daniël M Pelt
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2020-12-02       Impact factor: 8.140

Review 3.  Multiplex Tissue Imaging: Spatial Revelations in the Tumor Microenvironment.

Authors:  Stephanie van Dam; Matthijs J D Baars; Yvonne Vercoulen
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-28       Impact factor: 6.575

4.  On the objectivity, reliability, and validity of deep learning enabled bioimage analyses.

Authors:  Dennis Segebarth; Matthias Griebel; Christoph M Flath; Robert Blum; Nikolai Stein; Cora R von Collenberg; Corinna Martin; Dominik Fiedler; Lucas B Comeras; Anupam Sah; Victoria Schoeffler; Teresa Lüffe; Alexander Dürr; Rohini Gupta; Manju Sasi; Christina Lillesaar; Maren D Lange; Ramon O Tasan; Nicolas Singewald; Hans-Christian Pape
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2020-10-19       Impact factor: 8.140

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.