ArticleFrontiers in neuroanatomy2014
Active learning of neuron morphology for accurate automated tracing of neurites.
Article in Frontiers in neuroanatomy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
29 citing papers in PubMed.
- Layer-specific input to medial prefrontal cortex is linked to stress susceptibility.Translational psychiatry · 2025Article
- User-Assisted Approach for Accurate Nonrigid Registration of Images and Traces.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- High-throughput analysis of dendrite and axonal arbors reveals transcriptomic correlates of neuroanatomy.Nature communications · 2024Article
- NeuRegenerate: A Framework for Visualizing Neurodegeneration.IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics · 2023Article
- Neuron tracing from light microscopy images: automation, deep learning and bench testing.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2022Review
- Practical guide for preparation, computational reconstruction and analysis of 3D human neuronal networks in control and ischaemic conditions.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2022Article
- Smart imaging to empower brain-wide neuroscience at single-cell levels.Brain informatics · 2022Review
- Quantification of relative neurite tortuosity using Fourier transforms.Journal of neuroscience methods · 2021Article
- Correction of topological errors in automated traces of neurites.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2021Article
- Foreground Estimation in Neuronal Images With a Sparse-Smooth Model for Robust Quantification.Frontiers in neuroanatomy · 2021Article
- Content-Aware Enhancement of Images With Filamentous Structures.IEEE transactions on image processing : a publication of the IEEE Signal Processing Society · 2019Article
- Automated Neuron Reconstruction from 3D Fluorescence Microscopy Images Using Sequential Monte Carlo Estimation.Neuroinformatics · 2019Article
- Accurate registration ofProceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2019Article
- Artificial neural network filters for enhancing 3D optical microscopy images of neurites.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2019Article
- DeepNeuron: an open deep learning toolbox for neuron tracing.Brain informatics · 2018Article
- Automated 3D Soma Segmentation with Morphological Surface Evolution for Neuron Reconstruction.Neuroinformatics · 2018Article
- Unsupervised Learning and Pattern Recognition of Biological Data Structures with Density Functional Theory and Machine Learning.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- An open-source tool for analysis and automatic identification of dendritic spines using machine learning.PloS one · 2018Article
- Soma Detection in 3D Images of Neurons using Machine Learning Technique.Neuroinformatics · 2018Article
- Image-Based Profiling of Synaptic Connectivity in Primary Neuronal Cell Culture.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Automating the process of neurite tracing from light microscopy stacks of images is essential for large-scale or high-throughput quantitative studies of neural circuits. While the general layout of labeled neurites can be captured by many automated tracing algorithms, it is often not possible to differentiate reliably between the processes belonging to different cells. The reason is that some neurites in the stack may appear broken due to imperfect labeling, while others may appear fused due to the limited resolution of optical microscopy. Trained neuroanatomists routinely resolve such topological ambiguities during manual tracing tasks by combining information about distances between branches, branch orientations, intensities, calibers, tortuosities, colors, as well as the presence of spines or boutons. Likewise, to evaluate different topological scenarios automatically, we developed a machine learning approach that combines many of the above mentioned features. A specifically designed confidence measure was used to actively train the algorithm during user-assisted tracing procedure. Active learning significantly reduces the training time and makes it possible to obtain less than 1% generalization error rates by providing few training examples. To evaluate the overall performance of the algorithm a number of image stacks were reconstructed automatically, as well as manually by several trained users, making it possible to compare the automated traces to the baseline inter-user variability. Several geometrical and topological features of the traces were selected for the comparisons. These features include the total trace length, the total numbers of branch and terminal points, the affinity of corresponding traces, and the distances between corresponding branch and terminal points. Our results show that when the density of labeled neurites is sufficiently low, automated traces are not significantly different from manual reconstructions obtained by trained users.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.