Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39237561›Full record

ReviewLight, science & applications2024

Neural network-based processing and reconstruction of compromised biophotonic image data.

Michael John Fanous, Paloma Casteleiro Costa, Çağatay Işıl, Luzhe Huang, Aydogan Ozcan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Light, science & applications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Artificial Intelligence in Label-Free Optical Imaging Applications.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Michael John FanousElectrical and Computer Engineering Department, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-4069-9745
Paloma Casteleiro CostaElectrical and Computer Engineering Department, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7824-9805
Çağatay IşılElectrical and Computer Engineering Department, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3367-1858
Luzhe HuangElectrical and Computer Engineering Department, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Aydogan OzcanElectrical and Computer Engineering Department, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. ozcan@ucla.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0717-683X

Funding

TRD3: Data Analytics and Intelligent Systems (AI-ML-DL-Visualization)P41EB032840 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI Griffith R. Harsh, Laura Marcu · 2022 to 2026
$6.7M
NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB032840
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, the integration of deep learning techniques with biophotonic setups has opened new horizons in bioimaging. A compelling trend in this field involves deliberately compromising certain measurement metrics to engineer better bioimaging tools in terms of e.g., cost, speed, and form-factor, followed by compensating for the resulting defects through the utilization of deep learning models trained on a large amount of ideal, superior or alternative data. This strategic approach has found increasing popularity due to its potential to enhance various aspects of biophotonic imaging. One of the primary motivations for employing this strategy is the pursuit of higher temporal resolution or increased imaging speed, critical for capturing fine dynamic biological processes. Additionally, this approach offers the prospect of simplifying hardware requirements and complexities, thereby making advanced imaging standards more accessible in terms of cost and/or size. This article provides an in-depth review of the diverse measurement aspects that researchers intentionally impair in their biophotonic setups, including the point spread function (PSF), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), sampling density, and pixel resolution. By deliberately compromising these metrics, researchers aim to not only recuperate them through the application of deep learning networks, but also bolster in return other crucial parameters, such as the field of view (FOV), depth of field (DOF), and space-bandwidth product (SBP). Throughout this article, we discuss various biophotonic methods that have successfully employed this strategic approach. These techniques span a wide range of applications and showcase the versatility and effectiveness of deep learning in the context of compromised biophotonic data. Finally, by offering our perspectives on the exciting future possibilities of this rapidly evolving concept, we hope to motivate our readers from various disciplines to explore novel ways of balancing hardware compromises with compensation via artificial intelligence (AI).

Identifiers

PMID39237561
PMCPMC11377739

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.