ArticleEnvironmental science & technology2025
Integrating Machine Learning with Flow-Imaging Microscopy for Automated Monitoring of Algal Blooms.
Article in Environmental science & technology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Real-time monitoring of phytoplankton in freshwater systems is critical for early detection of harmful algal blooms (HABs) to enable efficient response by water management agencies. This manuscript presents an image processing pipeline developed to adapt ARTiMiS, a low-cost automated flow-imaging device, for real-time algal monitoring in natural freshwater systems. This pipeline addresses several challenges associated with autonomous imaging of aquatic samples, such as flow-imaging artifacts (i.e., out-of-focus and background objects), as well as strategies to efficiently identify novel objects that are not represented in the training data set; the latter is a common challenge with the application of deep learning approaches for image classification in environmental systems. The pipeline leverages a random forest model to identify out-of-focus particles with an accuracy of 89% and a custom background particle detection algorithm to identify and remove particles that erroneously appear in consecutive images with >97 ± 2.8% accuracy. Furthermore, a convolutional neural network (CNN), trained to classify taxonomical classes, achieved 95% accuracy in a closed set classification. Nonetheless, the supervised closed-set classifiers struggled with the accurate classification of objects when challenged with novel particles, which are common in complex natural environments; this limits real-time monitoring applications by requiring extensive manual oversight. To mitigate this, three methods incorporating classification with rejection were tested to improve model precision by flagging irrelevant or unknown classes. Combined, these advances present a fully integrated, end-to-end solution for real-time HAB monitoring in natural freshwater systems, which enhances the scalability of automated detection in dynamic aquatic environments.
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.