Data-driven spectroscopic dictionaries and detector-calibrated inference for photon-limited Raman hyperspectral imaging of living cells
Yagi, S.; Sagami, N.; Eshima, I.; Hiramatsu, K.
Show abstract
Label-free Raman imaging of living cells is photon limited: at exposures compatible with cellular dynamics, single-pixel spectra carry about one count per channel on a dominant smooth background. We present an unmixing framework in which the decoder of a physics-constrained autoencoder is restricted to a data-driven spectroscopic dictionary: band centers,widths, and pseudo-Voigt shapes are measured from the dataset and fixed, and the network learns only nonnegative band amplitudes, a smooth B-spline background, and a per-pixel gain.First, on slit-scanning images of HeLa cells (532 nm) the dictionary yields spike-free component spectra that read as band tables, including a resonance-enhanced cytochrome-c-associated component matching literature spectra, and the most stable decomposition against the component number. Second, the dictionary and initialization calibrated at 1 s exposure perline transfer to 100 ms per line (12 s sweeps): cytochrome-c spectral identity survives a single sweep (correlation 0.92) while its map remains photon limited; the dictionary provides spectral physicality, and the transferred initialization prevents a structural collapse that global map correlations miss; in a measurement-derived phantom the dictionary estimator holds thecytochrome-c spectrum to 17-19{degrees} spectral angle at 100 ms, where classical factorizations and free decoders lose it (55-64{degrees}). Estimation on the count-equivalent detector output uses a calibrated shifted-Poisson quasi-likelihood. Third, evaluation must be time matched:correlation against a separately acquired reference saturates through slow specimen drift and acquisition mismatch rather than photon noise, and the self-consistency of learned denoisers is inflated by shared bias; time-matched self-consistency and independent cross-checks areproposed.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.