ArticleScientific reports2022
Statistical distortion of supervised learning predictions in optical microscopy induced by image compression.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lossy DICOM conversion may affect AI performance.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The growth of data throughput in optical microscopy has triggered the extensive use of supervised learning (SL) models on compressed datasets for automated analysis. Investigating the effects of image compression on SL predictions is therefore pivotal to assess their reliability, especially for clinical use. We quantify the statistical distortions induced by compression through the comparison of predictions on compressed data to the raw predictive uncertainty, numerically estimated from the raw noise statistics measured via sensor calibration. Predictions on cell segmentation parameters are altered by up to 15% and more than 10 standard deviations after 16-to-8 bits pixel depth reduction and 10:1 JPEG compression. JPEG formats with higher compression ratios show significantly larger distortions. Interestingly, a recent metrologically accurate algorithm, offering up to 10:1 compression ratio, provides a prediction spread equivalent to that stemming from raw noise. The method described here allows to set a lower bound to the predictive uncertainty of a SL task and can be generalized to determine the statistical distortions originated from a variety of processing pipelines in AI-assisted fields.
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.