ArticleAIMS biophysics
Validation of 3D EM Reconstructions: The Phantom in the Noise.
Article in AIMS biophysics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- The relationship between the Ewald sphere and exit wave explored using focal series electron micrographs.IUCrJ · 2026Article
- Emerging Themes in CryoEM─Single Particle Analysis Image Processing.Chemical reviews · 2022Review
- Bsoft: Image Processing for Structural Biology.Bio-protocol · 2022Article
- Image Processing in Cryo-Electron Microscopy of Single Particles: The Power of Combining Methods.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021Article
- Validation tests for cryo-EM maps using an independent particle set.Journal of structural biology: X · 2020Article
- Structure Determination by Single-Particle Cryo-Electron Microscopy: Only the Sky (and Intrinsic Disorder) is the Limit.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Review
- Single-particle reconstruction statistics: a diagnostic tool in solving biomolecular structures by cryo-EM.Acta crystallographica. Section F, Structural biology communications · 2019Review
- The first single particle analysis Map Challenge: A summary of the assessments.Journal of structural biology · 2018Article
- Single particle reconstruction and validation using Bsoft for the map challenge.Journal of structural biology · 2018Article
- Guidelines for using Bsoft for high resolution reconstruction and validation of biomolecular structures from electron micrographs.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Validation is a necessity to trust the structures solved by electron microscopy by single particle techniques. The impressive achievements in single particle reconstruction fuel its expansion beyond a small community of image processing experts. This poses the risk of inappropriate data processing with dubious results. Nowhere is it more clearly illustrated than in the recovery of a reference density map from pure noise aligned to that map-a phantom in the noise. Appropriate use of existing validating methods such as resolution-limited alignment and the processing of independent data sets ("gold standard") avoid this pitfall. However, these methods can be undermined by biases introduced in various subtle ways. How can we test that a map is a coherent structure present in the images selected from the micrographs? In stead of viewing the phantom emerging from noise as a cautionary tale, it should be used as a defining baseline. Any map is always recoverable from noise images, provided a sufficient number of images are aligned and used in reconstruction. However, with smaller numbers of images, the expected coherence in the real particle images should yield better reconstructions than equivalent numbers of noise or background images, even without masking or imposing resolution limits as potential biases. The validation test proposed is therefore a simple alignment of a limited number of micrograph and noise images against the final reconstruction as reference, demonstrating that the micrograph images yield a better reconstruction. I examine synthetic cases to relate the resolution of a reconstruction to the alignment error as a function of the signal-to-noise ratio. I also administered the test to real cases of publicly available data. Adopting such a test can aid the microscopist in assessing the usefulness of the micrographs taken before committing to lengthy processing with questionable outcomes.
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.