ArticleScientific reports2021
An encryption-decryption framework to validating single-particle imaging.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. 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.
- Article
- Water layer and radiation damage effects on the orientation recovery of proteins in single-particle imaging at an X-ray free-electron laser.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Molecular size dependence on achievable resolution from XFEL single-particle 3D reconstruction.Structural dynamics (Melville, N.Y.) · 2023Article
- High-quality restoration image encryption using DCT frequency-domain compression coding and chaos.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Comparison of EMC and CM methods for orienting diffraction images in single-particle imaging experiments.IUCrJ · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We propose an encryption-decryption framework for validating diffraction intensity volumes reconstructed using single-particle imaging (SPI) with X-ray free-electron lasers (XFELs) when the ground truth volume is absent. This conceptual framework exploits each reconstructed volumes' ability to decipher latent variables (e.g. orientations) of unseen sentinel diffraction patterns. Using this framework, we quantify novel measures of orientation disconcurrence, inconsistency, and disagreement between the decryptions by two independently reconstructed volumes. We also study how these measures can be used to define data sufficiency and its relation to spatial resolution, and the practical consequences of focusing XFEL pulses to smaller foci. This conceptual framework overcomes critical ambiguities in using Fourier Shell Correlation (FSC) as a validation measure for SPI. Finally, we show how this encryption-decryption framework naturally leads to an information-theoretic reformulation of the resolving power of XFEL-SPI, which we hope will lead to principled frameworks for experiment and instrument design.
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.