ArticleScientific reports2025
Artifact detection in fluorescence microscopy using convolutional autoencoder.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Advanced Imaging for Live-Cell Spatiotemporal Monitoring: Technologies and Applications.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To ensure analytical accuracy in fluorescence microscopy image analysis, robust artifact detection is essential. For large datasets or time-sensitive analyses, automation is advisable, as it not only reduces time and costs but also eliminates human bias and enhances reproducibility. Although artificial intelligence is commonly employed for artifact detection, it is typically limited to recognizing artifact types that have been previously learned, often necessitating large training datasets. This study proposes an approach for an automated detection of previously unseen artifacts without the need for a training set of artifact-laden images. Multiple datasets were assembled using images generated by our surface-based intensity distribution analysis (sFIDA) technology during different experiments. A convolutional autoencoder was trained on a dataset of artifact-free images to reproduce preprocessed images accurately. Artifact-laden images are subsequently detected by computing the difference between the input and output of the model, with increased discrepancies indicating the presence of artifacts. The proposed model is capable of classifying artifacts across different datasets with an average accuracy of 95.5%. Additionally, the model was able to detect unseen artifacts of various types, including differences in cause, structure, size and intensity. The findings demonstrate that convolutional autoencoders provide a lightweight, but effective method for detecting artifact-laden images. While the method was tested only on sFIDA images, its design, which does not rely on an artifact specific training set, suggests potential for use across various microscopy techniques.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.