ArticleJournal of applied crystallography2022
Automatic bad-pixel mask maker for X-ray pixel detectors with application to serial crystallography.
Article in Journal of applied crystallography, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Powder diffraction data beyond the pattern: a practical review.Journal of applied crystallography · 2025Review
- Robust error calibration for serial crystallography.Acta crystallographica. Section D, Structural biology · 2025Article
- A Python package based on robust statistical analysis for serial crystallography data processing.Acta crystallographica. Section D, Structural biology · 2023Article
- Automatic bad-pixel mask maker for X-ray pixel detectors with application to serial crystallography.Journal of applied crystallography · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
X-ray crystallography has witnessed a massive development over the past decade, driven by large increases in the intensity and brightness of X-ray sources and enabled by employing high-frame-rate X-ray detectors. The analysis of large data sets is done via automatic algorithms that are vulnerable to imperfections in the detector and noise inherent with the detection process. By improving the model of the behaviour of the detector, data can be analysed more reliably and data storage costs can be significantly reduced. One major requirement is a software mask that identifies defective pixels in diffraction frames. This paper introduces a methodology and program based upon concepts of machine learning, called robust mask maker (RMM), for the generation of bad-pixel masks for large-area X-ray pixel detectors based on modern robust statistics. It is proposed to discriminate normally behaving pixels from abnormal pixels by analysing routine measurements made with and without X-ray illumination. Analysis software typically uses a Bragg peak finder to detect Bragg peaks and an indexing method to detect crystal lattices among those peaks. Without proper masking of the bad pixels, peak finding methods often confuse the abnormal values of bad pixels in a pattern with true Bragg peaks and flag such patterns as useful regardless, leading to storage of enormous uninformative data sets. Also, it is computationally very expensive for indexing methods to search for crystal lattices among false peaks and the solution may be biased. This paper shows how RMM vastly improves peak finders and prevents them from labelling bad pixels as Bragg peaks, by demonstrating its effectiveness on several serial crystallography data sets.
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.