ArticlePloS one2020
Semantic segmentation of HeLa cells: An objective comparison between one traditional algorithm and four deep-learning architectures.
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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- HeLa cell segmentation using digital image processing.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Efficient semi-supervised semantic segmentation of electron microscopy cancer images with sparse annotations.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Impact of Training Data, Ground Truth and Shape Variability in the Deep Learning-Based Semantic Segmentation of HeLa Cells Observed with Electron Microscopy.Journal of imaging · 2023Article
- Perception and classification of emotions in nonsense speech: Humans versus machines.PloS one · 2023Article
- Efficient semi-supervised semantic segmentation of electron microscopy cancer images with sparse annotations.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2023Article
- Weighted average ensemble-based semantic segmentation in biological electron microscopy images.Histochemistry and cell biology · 2022Article
- Volumetric Semantic Instance Segmentation of the Plasma Membrane of HeLa Cells.Journal of imaging · 2021Article
- CEM500K, a large-scale heterogeneous unlabeled cellular electron microscopy image dataset for deep learning.eLife · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
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
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.