ArticleBiomedical optics express2021
Parametric comparison between sparsity-based and deep learning-based image reconstruction of super-resolution fluorescence microscopy.
Article in Biomedical optics express, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fast DNA-PAINT imaging using a deep neural network.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Parametric comparison between sparsity-based and deep learning-based image reconstruction of super-resolution fluorescence microscopy.Biomedical optics express · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sparsity-based and deep learning-based image reconstruction algorithms are two promising approaches to accelerate the image acquisition process for localization-based super-resolution microscopy, by allowing a higher density of fluorescing emitters to be imaged in a single frame. Despite the surging popularity, a comprehensive parametric study guiding the practical applications of sparsity-based and deep learning-based image reconstruction algorithms is yet to be conducted. In this study, we examined the performance of sparsity- and deep learning-based algorithms in reconstructing super-resolution images using simulated fluorescent microscopy images. The simulated images were synthesized with varying levels of sparsity and connectivity. We found the deep learning-based VDSR recovers image faster, with a higher recall rate and localization accuracy. The sparsity-based SPIDER recovers more zero pixels truthfully. We also compared the two algorithms using images acquired from a real super-resolution experiment, yielding results agreeing with the results from the evaluation using simulated images. We concluded that VDSR is preferable when accurate emitter localization is needed while SPIDER is more suitable when evaluation of the number of emitters is critical.
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.