ArticleScientific reports2019
NV center based nano-NMR enhanced by deep learning.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Regressions on quantum neural networks at maximal expressivity.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Quantum neural networks with multi-qubit potentials.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Parallel detection and spatial mapping of large nuclear spin clusters.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Deep neural networks to recover unknown physical parameters from oscillating time series.PloS one · 2022Article
- Emerging role of machine learning in light-matter interaction.Light, science & applications · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The growing field of nano nuclear magnetic resonance (nano-NMR) seeks to estimate spectra or discriminate between spectra of minuscule amounts of complex molecules. While this field holds great promise, nano-NMR experiments suffer from detrimental inherent noise. This strong noise masks to the weak signal and results in a very low signal-to-noise ratio. Moreover, the noise model is usually complex and unknown, which renders the data processing of the measurement results very complicated. Hence, spectra discrimination is hard to achieve and in particular, it is difficult to reach the optimal discrimination. In this work we present strong indications that this difficulty can be overcome by deep learning (DL) algorithms. The DL algorithms can mitigate the adversarial effects of the noise efficiently by effectively learning the noise model. We show that in the case of frequency discrimination DL algorithms reach the optimal discrimination without having any pre-knowledge of the physical model. Moreover, the DL discrimination scheme outperform Bayesian methods when verified on noisy experimental data obtained by a single Nitrogen-Vacancy (NV) center. In the case of frequency resolution we show that this approach outperforms Bayesian methods even when the latter have full pre-knowledge of the noise model and the former has none. These DL algorithms also emerge as much more efficient in terms of computational resources and run times. Since in many real-world scenarios the noise is complex and difficult to model, we argue that DL is likely to become a dominant tool in the field.
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.