4.7 Article

Test-time augmentation for deep learning-based cell segmentation on microscopy images

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 10, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-61808-3

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. LENDULET-BIOMAG Grant [2018-342]
  2. European Regional Development Funds [GINOP-2.3.2-15-2016-00006, GINOP-2.3.2-15-2016-00037]
  3. Doctoral School of Interdisciplinary Medicine of the University of Szeged
  4. Doctoral School of Computer Science at the National Research University, Higher School of Economics

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recent advancements in deep learning have revolutionized the way microscopy images of cells are processed. Deep learning network architectures have a large number of parameters, thus, in order to reach high accuracy, they require a massive amount of annotated data. A common way of improving accuracy builds on the artificial increase of the training set by using different augmentation techniques. A less common way relies on test-time augmentation (TTA) which yields transformed versions of the image for prediction and the results are merged. In this paper we describe how we have incorporated the test-time argumentation prediction method into two major segmentation approaches utilized in the single-cell analysis of microscopy images. These approaches are semantic segmentation based on the U-Net, and instance segmentation based on the Mask R-CNN models. Our findings show that even if only simple test-time augmentations (such as rotation or flipping and proper merging methods) are applied, TTA can significantly improve prediction accuracy. We have utilized images of tissue and cell cultures from the Data Science Bowl (DSB) 2018 nuclei segmentation competition and other sources. Additionally, boosting the highest-scoring method of the DSB with TTA, we could further improve prediction accuracy, and our method has reached an ever-best score at the DSB.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available