Back

U-Net as a deep learning-based method for platelets segmentation in microscopic images

de Sousa, E. M. V.; Kumar, A.; Coupland, C.; Vaz, T. F.; Jones, W.; Valcarce-Dineiro, R.; Calaminus, S. D. J.

2024-08-23 health informatics
10.1101/2024.08.23.24312502 medRxiv
Show abstract

Manual counting of platelets, in microscopy images, is greatly time-consuming. Our goal was to automatically segment and count platelets images using a deep learning approach, applying U-Net and Fully Convolutional Network (FCN) modelling. Data preprocessing was done by creating binary masks and utilizing supervised learning with ground-truth labels. Data augmentation was implemented, for improved model robustness and detection. The number of detected regions was then retrieved as a count. The study investigated the U-Net models performance with different datasets, indicating notable improvements in segmentation metrics as the dataset size increased, while FCN performance was only evaluated with the smaller dataset and abandoned due to poor results. U-Net surpassed FCN in both detection and counting measures in the smaller dataset Dice 0.90, accuracy of 0.96 (U-Net) vs Dice 0.60 and 0.81 (FCN). When tested in a bigger dataset U-Net produced even better values (Dice 0.99, accuracy of 0.98). The U-Net model proves to be particularly effective as the dataset size increases, showcasing its versatility and accuracy in handling varying cell sizes and appearances. These data show potential areas for further improvement and the promising application of deep learning in automating cell segmentation for diverse life science research applications. Author SummaryDeep Learning can be used with good results for automatic cells images segmentations, reducing the time applied by scientists to this task. In our research platelets images were automatically segmented and counted using by applying U-Net and Fully Convolutional Network (FCN) modelling. Data preprocessing was done by creating binary masks and utilizing supervised learning with ground-truth labels, after data augmentation. U-Net surpassed FCN in both detection and counting measures in a smaller dataset. The U-Net model proves to be particularly effective as the dataset size increases, showcasing its versatility and accuracy in handling varying cell sizes and appearances. Our study shows potential areas for further improvement and the promising application of deep learning in automating cell segmentation for diverse life science research applications.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 12%
14.7%
2
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.7%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 11%
7.3%
4
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
5.0%
5
Advanced Biology
29 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.4%
6
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.8%
7
Physical Biology
43 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.7%
50% of probability mass above
8
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.7%
9
SoftwareX
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.1%
10
Frontiers in Bioinformatics
45 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.8%
11
Informatics in Medicine Unlocked
21 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
12
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
13
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
14
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
15
Applied Sciences
24 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.4%
16
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.4%
17
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.1%
18
International Journal of Medical Informatics
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
19
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 22%
0.9%
20
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
21
Mathematics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
22
Frontiers in Digital Health
20 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
23
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
216 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.7%
24
Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
38 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
25
BioMed Research International
25 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
26
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.7%
27
Briefings in Bioinformatics
326 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
28
Data in Brief
13 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.5%
29
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.5%
30
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%