ArticleNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Nanoparticle Recognition on Scanning Probe Microscopy Images Using Computer Vision and Deep Learning.
Article in Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 75 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Workflow for Transmission Electron Microscopy: From Data Analysis Automation to Materials Knowledge Unveiling.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026Article
- A deep learning method for nanoparticle size measurement in SEM images.RSC advances · 2025Article
- Quantifying Monomer-Dimer Distribution of Nanoparticles from Uncorrelated Optical Images Using Deep Learning.ACS omega · 2025Article
- Thermally Induced Surface Structure and Morphology Evolution in Bimetallic Pt-Au/HOPG Nanoparticles as Probed Using XPS and STM.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Automated Recognition of Nanoparticles in Electron Microscopy Images of Nanoscale Palladium Catalysts.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Digital Innovation Enabled Nanomaterial Manufacturing; Machine Learning Strategies and Green Perspectives.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Nanoparticle Detection on SEM Images Using a Neural Network and Semi-Synthetic Training Data.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- AI-based atomic force microscopy image analysis allows to predict electrochemical impedance spectra of defects in tethered bilayer membranes.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Near-Ambient Pressure XPS and MS Study of CO Oxidation over Model Pd-Au/HOPG Catalysts: The Effect of the Metal Ratio.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- SRPES and STM data for the model bimetallic Pd-In/HOPG catalysts: Effects of mild post-synthesis oxidative treatments.Data in brief · 2021Article
- Deep neural network analysis of nanoparticle ordering to identify defects in layered carbon materials.Chemical science · 2021Article
- Deep Learning Based Instance Segmentation of Titanium Dioxide Particles in the Form of Agglomerates in Scanning Electron Microscopy.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Identifying, counting and measuring particles is an important component of many research studies. Images with particles are usually processed by hand using a software ruler. Automated processing, based on conventional image processing methods (edge detection, segmentation, etc.) are not universal, can only be used on good-quality images and need to set a number of parameters empirically. In this paper, we present results from the application of deep learning to automated recognition of metal nanoparticles deposited on highly oriented pyrolytic graphite on images obtained by scanning tunneling microscopy (STM). We used the Cascade Mask-RCNN neural network. Training was performed on a dataset containing 23 STM images with 5157 nanoparticles. Three images containing 695 nanoparticles were used for verification. As a result, the trained neural network recognized nanoparticles in the verification set with 0.93 precision and 0.78 recall. Predicted contour refining with 2D Gaussian function was a proposed option. The accuracies for mean particle size calculated from predicted contours compared with ground truth were in the range of 0.87-0.99. The results were compared with outcomes from other generally available software, based on conventional image processing methods. The advantages of deep learning methods for automatic particle recognition were clearly demonstrated. We developed a free open-access web service "ParticlesNN" based on the trained neural network, which can be used by any researcher in the world.
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.