Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33006963›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Semantic segmentation of HeLa cells: An objective comparison between one traditional algorithm and four deep-learning architectures.

Cefa Karabağ, Martin L Jones, Christopher J Peddie, Anne E Weston, Lucy M Collinson, Constantino Carlos Reyes-Aldasoro

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Cefa KarabağResearch Centre for Biomedical Engineering School of Mathematics, Computer Science and Engineering, Department of Electrical & Electronic Engineering, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4424-0471
Martin L JonesElectron Microscopy Science Technology Platform, The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0994-5652
Christopher J PeddieElectron Microscopy Science Technology Platform, The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom.
Anne E WestonElectron Microscopy Science Technology Platform, The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom.
Lucy M CollinsonElectron Microscopy Science Technology Platform, The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom.
Constantino Carlos Reyes-AldasorogiCentre, Department of Computer Science, School of Mathematics, Computer Science and Engineering, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
The Francis Crick Institute · GBCity, University of London · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK FC001999Medical Research Council FC001999Wellcome Trust FC001999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The quantitative study of cell morphology is of great importance as the structure and condition of cells and their structures can be related to conditions of health or disease. The first step towards that, is the accurate segmentation of cell structures. In this work, we compare five approaches, one traditional and four deep-learning, for the semantic segmentation of the nuclear envelope of cervical cancer cells commonly known as HeLa cells. Images of a HeLa cancer cell were semantically segmented with one traditional image-processing algorithm and four three deep learning architectures: VGG16, ResNet18, Inception-ResNet-v2, and U-Net. Three hundred slices, each 2000 × 2000 pixels, of a HeLa Cell were acquired with Serial Block Face Scanning Electron Microscopy. The first three deep learning architectures were pre-trained with ImageNet and then fine-tuned with transfer learning. The U-Net architecture was trained from scratch with 36, 000 training images and labels of size 128 × 128. The image-processing algorithm followed a pipeline of several traditional steps like edge detection, dilation and morphological operators. The algorithms were compared by measuring pixel-based segmentation accuracy and Jaccard index against a labelled ground truth. The results indicated a superior performance of the traditional algorithm (Accuracy = 99%, Jaccard = 93%) over the deep learning architectures: VGG16 (93%, 90%), ResNet18 (94%, 88%), Inception-ResNet-v2 (94%, 89%), and U-Net (92%, 56%).

Indexed as

AlgorithmsDeep LearningHeLa CellsHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMicroscopy, Atomic Force

Identifiers

PMID33006963
PMCPMC7531863
OpenAlexW3090196836

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.