ArticleNature methods2026
Lessons learned from a Kaggle challenge for particle picking in cryo-electron tomography.
Article in Nature methods, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Graph identification of proteins in tomograms (GRIP-Tomo) 2.0: Topologically aware classification for proteins.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2026Article
- Bridging annotated microscopy imaging data and analysis method development for scientific discovery.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Review
- AreTomoLive: automated reconstruction of comprehensively corrected and denoised cryo-electron tomograms in real time and at high throughput.Nature methods · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
28 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The difficulty of particle picking in cryo-electron tomography remains a barrier to routine in situ structure determination. Machine learning is well suited to overcome this bottleneck with efficient algorithms that generalize across molecular species. To spur new algorithm development, we held a 3-month Kaggle challenge that tasked contestants with annotating five molecular species across hundreds of experimental tomograms. Here we analyze the results of this competition, which successfully engaged >1,000 participants and delivered particle pickers that outperformed existing state of the art. Systematic comparisons of the contestants' submissions revealed the tolerance of subtomogram averaging to moderate but not severe over-picking and underscored the need for more robust measures of annotation quality. The winning models also highlighted the importance of data augmentation to overcome limited training data. All competition tomograms along with the ground truth and winning teams' annotations have been released on the CryoET Data Portal as a resource to benchmark current and future particle picking algorithms.
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.