Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 152 references

The evolution of AI from image interpretation toward scientific inference in nanoparticle electron microscopy

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-07-14 · grok-4.5

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read AI in nanoparticle electron microscopy is shifting from labeling what is visible to recovering structure, dynamics, and materials insight.

desk verdict Solid challenge-organized review of AI for nanoparticle EM; useful taxonomy and fidelity caveats, ordinary review-selection risk on the tables. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.10388 v1 pith:N35EQ5CQ submitted 2026-07-11 cond-mat.mtrl-sci cs.AI

Evropi Toulkeridou , Jiafei Li , Leonardo Lari , Panagiotis Grammatikopoulos This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mtrl-scics.AI
keywords electronmicroscopynanoparticlesdeeplearningcomputervisioninsituTEMstructuralinferencephysics-informedautonomous
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This review argues that artificial intelligence for nanoparticle electron microscopy has moved past routine image labeling. Early work automated detection, counting, and segmentation of particles in TEM images. Newer methods try to restore atomic-scale detail from noisy low-dose data, infer three-dimensional shape and crystallography from two-dimensional projections, and quantify growth, coalescence, and surface motion in in situ videos. The authors organize the field by scientific challenge rather than algorithm fashion, and they show how convolutional networks, transformers, self-supervised models, foundation models, and physics-informed training are being combined with simulations and microscope metadata. The practical stake is clear: once AI can extract physically meaningful descriptors at scale, electron microscopy becomes a quantitative engine for relating synthesis, structure, dynamics, and function, and for closing the loop toward autonomous materials discovery.

What carries the argument

A hierarchical task ladder from detection and segmentation, through atomic-resolution restoration, to 2D-to-3D structural inference and spatiotemporal analysis of in situ data, with physics-informed and simulation-driven learning as the bridge from visible pixels to latent physical variables.

What would settle it

A community benchmark that holds the same models to experimental nanoparticle TEM, HRTEM, and in situ video sets with independent physical validation (for example measured growth rates, facet statistics, or strain maps) and shows that the claimed progression from image labeling to reliable scientific inference does not hold outside simulation or narrow curated tests.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

AI methodologies in nanoparticle electron microscopy have evolved from image-level interpretation—detection and segmentation—into tools for scientific inference: recovering lattice-level structure under noise, estimating latent three-dimensional morphology from projections, and quantifying dynamic nanoscale processes, by coupling computer vision with microscopy physics, simulation-based training, metadata, and increasingly autonomous experimental control.

Load-bearing premise

That the reported performance ranges and maturity levels across detection, denoising, structural inference, and dynamics fairly represent the broader literature, even though many high scores rest on simulated ground truth or carefully curated datasets that may not match routine experimental conditions.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Detection and segmentation become routine infrastructure, while the competitive frontier shifts to restoration fidelity, uncertainty-aware 3D inference, and kinetic quantification from video.
  • Physics-informed and hybrid simulation–experiment training becomes standard for atomic-resolution and inverse problems because pure data-driven models lack experimental ground truth.
  • Benchmarking moves from PSNR, Dice, and mAP toward structural fidelity metrics (such as Fourier ring correlation) and measurable physical outputs (diffusion coefficients, coalescence rates, facet distributions).
  • Foundation models, multimodal image–metadata systems, and closed-loop AI control turn microscopes into active discovery platforms rather than post-processing cameras.
  • Materials discovery pipelines can treat AI-extracted nanoparticle descriptors as direct inputs to structure–property models and inverse design.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If structural inference and dynamics remain under-benchmarked relative to detection, the field risks overstating readiness for autonomous materials discovery while the load-bearing inverse problems stay unstandardized.
  • The same hierarchical ladder implies that progress on rare-event kinetics and defect energetics will depend more on uncertainty quantification and domain adaptation than on larger generic vision backbones alone.
  • Commercial AI microscopy platforms will face pressure to publish transparent experimental benchmarks, not only internal Dice or mAP numbers, if the review’s maturity map is taken seriously.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This review argues that AI for nanoparticle electron microscopy has progressed from image-level interpretation (detection/segmentation of TEM ensembles) toward scientific inference: atomic-resolution restoration with structural fidelity, 2D-to-3D structural inference, spatiotemporal analysis of in situ dynamics, and closed-loop autonomous experimentation. The narrative is organized by scientific challenge rather than by algorithm family (Fig. 2; §§4–7), covering TEM/HRTEM/STEM and in situ TEM, and spanning CNNs through transformers, self-supervised learning, foundation models, multimodal AI, and physics-informed/simulation-driven methods. Representative performance and evaluation tables (Tables 1–4) and architecture appendices (Tables A1–A4) support maturity rankings and a forward-looking agenda (Table 5; §8).

Significance. If the synthesis is accepted, the paper provides a useful, problem-centered map of a rapidly expanding and fragmented literature for materials scientists and microscopists. Strengths include the hierarchical framing (Fig. 2), repeated emphasis on simulation-to-experiment domain gap, structural fidelity over PSNR/SSIM (FRC, crystallographic consistency), and the need for uncertainty quantification and community benchmarks (§§5.4, 6.3, 7.4, 8). The appendices (A1–A4) and commercial-tool mention give practical orientation. As a review, its value is organizational and critical rather than a new theorem or experiment; residual risk is ordinary selection/maturity bias in aggregated metrics, which the manuscript already flags.

major comments (2)
  1. Table 1 and §4.5 present typical mAP/Dice/IoU ranges (e.g., Dice 0.85–0.95, mAP >0.90) as evidence of maturity. The text correctly notes dependence on morphology, contrast, and annotation, but the table still reads as cross-study comparable. Please state explicitly that ranges are illustrative upper bounds from curated datasets (often with simulated or expert labels), not meta-analytic estimates, and add a short note on how many studies and what domain shifts underlie each row so maturity rankings cannot be over-read.
  2. Tables 2–4 and §§5.4, 6.3, 7.4 correctly stress missing experimental ground truth and domain shift, yet Table 5 and §8 still rank detection/segmentation as “highly mature” and list foundation models/closed-loop systems as primary next drivers. Tighten the link: either qualify maturity labels with “on curated/static TEM” vs “atomic/dynamic/inverse tasks,” or add one paragraph that separates (i) routine morphology pipelines from (ii) inference tasks where simulation fidelity and uncertainty remain load-bearing, so the evolutionary claim is not overstated by the most mature subfield alone.
minor comments (5)
  1. Figure 1 caption and text cite Scopus analysis “performed in April 2026” and a 2025 peak of 735 papers; ensure the query string, date, and counts are reproducible and consistent with the arXiv posting timeline.
  2. Several figure panels (Figs. 3–7, A1) are author-generated schematics “inspired by” literature; captions should state more clearly that they are illustrative, not reprocessed experimental data, to avoid misreading as primary results.
  3. Reference list has occasional incomplete or inconsistent entries (e.g., missing DOIs or venue details for some 2025–2026 items; Table A4 “Giner et al.” with “—” DOI). Normalize citations and fix typographical issues (e.g., “Heslignton,” duplicated sensing refs [7, 12, 12]).
  4. Appendix Tables A1–A3 are valuable but dense; a brief caveat that “First Use in Microscopy” is a class of applications rather than a single definitive paper (already noted in text) should appear in the table caption for skimmers.
  5. Commercial platform SenseAI is listed in Table A4/Table 5; a one-sentence disclosure of any author relationship (or none) would improve transparency for readers.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: this is a hierarchical literature review whose evolutionary narrative is synthesis of external work, not a self-referential prediction or fitted result.

full rationale

The manuscript is a review organized around a hierarchy of AI tasks in nanoparticle electron microscopy (detection/segmentation → atomic restoration → 2D-to-3D inference → spatiotemporal dynamics → scientific inference; Abstract; §§1–3, 8; Fig. 2). It does not claim a first-principles derivation, uniqueness theorem, or parameter-free prediction that could reduce to its own inputs. Representative performance ranges (Tables 1–4) and architecture timelines (Tables A1–A4) are presented as literature summaries with explicit caveats on simulated ground truth, domain shift, missing community benchmarks, and hallucination risk (§§4.5, 5.4, 6.3, 7.4). Author-related citations (e.g., nanoparticle synthesis/microscopy background) are ordinary context and do not force the review’s conclusions by construction. No self-definitional equation, fitted-input-called-prediction, load-bearing self-citation uniqueness claim, or renamed known result appears. Circularity score is therefore 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

As a review, the paper’s load-bearing premises are domain assumptions about microscopy physics, data scarcity, and the validity of literature-reported metrics, not free parameters or invented physical entities. No numerical model is fitted to produce a central prediction.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption TEM/STEM images are 2D projections of 3D nanostructures whose contrast is governed by electron scattering, dose, aberrations, thickness, and orientation.
    Invoked throughout §§2, 5–6 as the reason restoration and 3D inference are inverse problems rather than pure computer-vision tasks.
  • domain assumption Experimentally verified noise-free atomic-resolution ground truth is generally unavailable, so simulation-driven or self-supervised training is necessary.
    Central to §§5.2 and 6.1; underpins reliance on multi-slice simulations and physics-informed learning.
  • ad hoc to paper Reported detection/segmentation metrics (mAP, Dice, IoU) and restoration metrics (PSNR, SSIM, FRC) are sufficiently comparable across studies to support maturity rankings.
    Tables 1–4 aggregate heterogeneous literature results; the paper itself notes dependence on morphology, contrast, and annotation quality.
  • ad hoc to paper Foundation models, multimodal learning, and closed-loop autonomous microscopy will become primary drivers of next-generation nanoparticle characterization.
    Forward-looking claim in Abstract, §8, and Table 5; supported by early citations but not established as settled fact.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The evolution of AI from image interpretation toward scientific inference in nanoparticle electron microscopy." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/N35EQ5CQ

@misc{pith2026260710388,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The evolution of AI from image interpretation toward scientific inference in nanoparticle electron microscopy},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/N35EQ5CQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.10388}
}
read the original abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming electron microscopy by enabling quantitative analysis of increasingly large and complex datasets for nanoparticle characterization. Recent advances in machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) have expanded microscopy from a descriptive imaging technique into a data-driven platform for structural interpretation, dynamic analysis, and scientific inference. This review examines AI methodologies for nanoparticle electron microscopy, focusing on transmission electron microscopy (TEM), high-resolution transmission electron microscopy (HRTEM), scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM), and in situ TEM. The discussion is organized around the principal challenges in nanoparticle characterization, including particle detection, segmentation, morphology quantification, atomic-resolution restoration, defect identification, two-dimensional-to-three-dimensional structural inference, and analysis of dynamic processes in situ. We review computational approaches from conventional ML and convolutional neural networks to transformer architectures, self-supervised learning, foundation models, multimodal AI, and physics-informed learning. We further discuss integrating microscopy data with simulations, metadata, and autonomous experimentation to relate nanoparticle structure, dynamics, synthesis conditions, and functional properties. The advantages, limitations, benchmarking, and data requirements of current methodologies are critically assessed. Finally, emerging opportunities for foundation models, AI-guided microscopy, closed-loop experimentation, and autonomous materials discovery are discussed. By integrating advances across computer vision, materials informatics, and electron microscopy, this review highlights the role of AI in next-generation nanoparticle characterization and accelerated materials discovery.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.10388 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Annual number of publications related to artificial intelligence and nanoparticle electron microscopy indexed in Scopus between 2012 and 2026, based on the query [(TEM OR HRTEM OR STEM) AND nanoparticle AND (deep learning OR machine learning)] restricted to the Materials Science subject area. A total of 2415 documents were identified. The plot reveals limited activity during the early 2010s, followed by rapid expans… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Representative electron microscopy modalities commonly used in nanoparticle characterization. (a) Conventional TEM illustrating nanoparticle ensemble morphology and size distribution. (b) HRTEM illustrating atomic-resolution lattice imaging within an individual nanoparticle. (c) Illustrative in situ TEM time sequence showing structural evolution during dynamic nanoparticle processes. All panels are author-generated … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Workflow for AI-assisted nanoparticle analysis in TEM. Raw TEM images are processed through DL–based detection and instance segmentation to identify individual nanoparticles, delineate particle boundaries, and extract quantitative descriptors such as size distributions, morphology, and population statistics. The figure illustrates the transition from microscopy image acquisition to automated high-throughput nanopart… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Schematic illustration of AI-assisted spatiotemporal analysis of nanoparticle dynamics in in situ TEM. (a) Initial nanoparticle configuration before structural evolution. (b) Dynamic restructuring and neck formation during particle interaction. (c) Final coalesced nano…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

152 extracted references · 75 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Nanoparticle Design by Gas-Phase Synthesis

    Grammatikopoulos, P.; Steinhauer, S.; Vernieres, J.; Singh, V.; Sowwan, M. Nanoparticle Design by Gas-Phase Synthesis. Adv. Phys. X 2016, 1, 81–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/23746149.2016.1142829

    doi:10.1080/23746149.2016.1142829 2016

  2. [2]

    Metal Catalysts for Heterogeneous Catalysis: From Single Atoms to Nanoclusters and Nanoparticles

    Liu, L.; Corma, A. Metal Catalysts for Heterogeneous Catalysis: From Single Atoms to Nanoclusters and Nanoparticles. Chem. Rev. 2018, 118, 4981–5079. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.7b00776

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.7b00776 2018

  3. [3]

    U.; Khan, M

    Farooq, N.; Rehman, Z. U.; Khan, M. I.; et al. Nanomaterial-Based Energy Conversion and Energy Storage Devices: A Comprehensive Review. New J. Chem. 2024, 48, 8933. https://doi.org/10.1039/D3NJ04846B

    work page doi:10.1039/d3nj04846b 2024

  4. [4]

    N.; Hall, W

    Anker, J. N.; Hall, W. P.; Lyandres, O.; Shah, N. C.; Zhao, J.; Van Duyne, R. P. Biosensing with Plasmonic Nanosensors. Nat. Mater. 2008, 7, 442–453. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat2162

    doi:10.1038/nmat2162 2008

  5. [5]

    Magnetic Nanoparticles: Synthesis, Anisotropy, and Applications

    Ma, Z.; et al. Magnetic Nanoparticles: Synthesis, Anisotropy, and Applications. Chem. Rev. 2022, 122, 127–231. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00860

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00860 2022

  6. [6]

    McNamara, K.; Tofail, S. A. M. Nanoparticles in Biomedical Applications. Adv. Phys. X 2017, 2, 54–

    2017

  7. [7]

    https://doi.org/10.1080/23746149.2016.1254570

    doi:10.1080/23746149.2016.1254570 2016

  8. [8]

    M.; Hafner, J

    Mayer, K. M.; Hafner, J. H. Localized Surface Plasmon Resonance Sensors. Chem. Rev. 2011, 111, 3828–3857. https://doi.org/10.1021/cr100313v

    doi:10.1021/cr100313v 2011

Show all 152 references
  1. [9]

    B.; Gupta, A.; Pandey, A

    Bhattacharya, S.; Gupta, A. B.; Gupta, A.; Pandey, A. A Review on Nanomaterials for Environmental Remediation. Energy Environ. Sci. 2012, 5, 8075–8109. https://doi.org/10.1039/C2EE21818F

    2012 doi

  2. [10]

    L.; Seifer, S.; Ilavsky, J.; Pellin, M.; Sowwan, M.; Grammatikopoulos, P.; Vajda, S

    Halder, A.; Kioseoglou, J.; Yang, B.; Kolipaka, K. L.; Seifer, S.; Ilavsky, J.; Pellin, M.; Sowwan, M.; Grammatikopoulos, P.; Vajda, S. Nanoassemblies of Ultrasmall Clusters with Remarkable Activity in 43 Carbon Dioxide Conversion to C1 Fuels. Nanoscale 2019, 11, 4683–4687. ht...

    2019 doi

  3. [11]

    Hydrogen Flux through Size-Selected Pd Nanoparticles into Underlying Mg Nanofilms

    Kumar, S.; Pavloudis, T.; Singh, V.; Nguyen, S.; Steinhauer, S.; Pursell, C.; Clemens, B.; Kioseoglou, J.; Grammatikopoulos, P.; Sowwan, M. Hydrogen Flux through Size-Selected Pd Nanoparticles into Underlying Mg Nanofilms. Adv. Energy Mater. 2018, 8, 1701326. https://doi.org/1...

    2018 doi

  4. [12]

    S.; Mathioudaki, S.; Kioseoglou, J.; Grammatikopoulos, P

    Bohra, M.; Giaremis, S.; Abisegapriyan, K. S.; Mathioudaki, S.; Kioseoglou, J.; Grammatikopoulos, P. Ferromagnetic-Antiferromagnetic Coupling in Gas-Phase Synthesized M(Fe, Co, Ni)-Cr Nanoparticles for Next-Generation Magnetic Applications. Adv. Sci. 2024, 11, 2403708. https:/...

    2024 doi

  5. [13]

    Adjusting Surface Coverage of Pt Nanocatalyst Decoration for Selectivity Control in CMOS-Integrated SnO₂ Thin Film Sensors

    Sosada-Ludwikowska, F.; Reiner, L.; Egger, L.; Lackner, E.; Krainer, J.; Wimmer-Teubenbacher, R.; Singh, V.; Steinhauer, S.; Grammatikopoulos, P.; Köck, A. Adjusting Surface Coverage of Pt Nanocatalyst Decoration for Selectivity Control in CMOS-Integrated SnO₂ Thin Film Sensor...

    2024 doi

  6. [14]

    E.; Nordlund, K.; Djurabekova, F.; Grammatikopoulos, P.; Sowwan, M

    Vernieres, J.; Steinhauer, S.; Zhao, J.; Chapelle, A.; Menini, P.; Dufour, N.; Diaz, R. E.; Nordlund, K.; Djurabekova, F.; Grammatikopoulos, P.; Sowwan, M. Gas Phase Synthesis of Multifunctional Fe- Based Nanocubes. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2017, 27, 1605328. https://doi.org/10.1002...

    2017 doi

  7. [15]

    B.; Carter, C

    Williams, D. B.; Carter, C. B. Transmission Electron Microscopy: A Textbook for Materials Science; Springer: New York, 2009

    2009

  8. [16]

    J.; Nellist, P

    Pennycook, S. J.; Nellist, P. D., Eds. Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy: Imaging and Analysis; Springer: New York, 2011

    2011

  9. [17]

    A Versatile Machine Learning Workflow for High-Throughput Analysis of Supported Metal Catalyst Particles

    Genç, A.; Marlowe, J.; Jalil, A.; Belzberg, D.; Kovarik, L.; Christopher, P. A Versatile Machine Learning Workflow for High-Throughput Analysis of Supported Metal Catalyst Particles. Ultramicroscopy 2025, 271, 114116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2025.114116

    2025 doi

  10. [18]

    Statistical Characterization of the Morphologies of Nanoparticles through Machine Learning Based Electron Microscopy Image Analysis

    Lee, B.; et al. Statistical Characterization of the Morphologies of Nanoparticles through Machine Learning Based Electron Microscopy Image Analysis. ACS Nano 2020, 14, 17125–17133. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.0c06809

    2020 doi

  11. [19]

    Ziatdinov, M.; Dyck, O.; Jesse, S.; Kalinin, S. V. Deep Learning of Atomically Resolved Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy Data. ACS Nano 2017, 11:12, 12742-12752. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.7b07504

    2017 doi

  12. [20]

    B.; Hansen, T

    Madsen, J.; Liu, P.; Kling, J.; Wagner, J. B.; Hansen, T. W.; Winther, O.; Schiøtz, J. A. Deep Learning Approach to Identify Local Structures in Atomic-Resolution Transmission Electron Microscopy Images. Adv. Theory Simul. 2018, 1, 1800037. https://doi.org/10.1002/adts.201800037

    2018 doi

  13. [21]

    Four-Dimensional Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy (4D-STEM): From Scanning Nanodiffraction to Ptychography and Beyond

    Ophus, C. Four-Dimensional Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy (4D-STEM): From Scanning Nanodiffraction to Ptychography and Beyond. Microsc. Microanal. 2019, 25, 563–582. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1431927619000497

    2019 doi

  14. [22]

    Characterization of Nanomaterials Using In Situ Liquid-Cell Transmission Electron Microscopy

    Chen, Y.; et al. Characterization of Nanomaterials Using In Situ Liquid-Cell Transmission Electron Microscopy. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 2023, 6, 24, 22545–22567. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsanm.3c03003 44

    2023 doi

  15. [23]

    Recent Advances in In Situ Transmission Electron Microscopy for Heterogeneous Catalysis

    Qu, J.; et al. Recent Advances in In Situ Transmission Electron Microscopy for Heterogeneous Catalysis. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2023, 26, 7, 107072. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2023.107072

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    H.; Johnstone, D

    Martineau, B. H.; Johnstone, D. N.; van Helvoort, A. T. J.; et al. Unsupervised Machine Learning Applied to Scanning Precession Electron Diffraction Data. Adv. Struct. Chem. Imaging 2019, 5, 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40679-019-0063-3

    2019 doi

  17. [25]

    Scanning Precession Electron Diffraction—Beyond Orientation and Phase Mapping

    Bergh, T. Scanning Precession Electron Diffraction—Beyond Orientation and Phase Mapping. Microsc. Microanal. 2025, 31 (Suppl. 1), ozaf048.288. https://doi.org/10.1093/mam/ozaf048.288

    2025 doi

  18. [26]

    L.; Lari, L.; Ward, M

    Gai, P. L.; Lari, L.; Ward, M. R.; Boyes, E. D. Visualisation of Single Atom Dynamics and their Role in Nanocatalysts under Controlled Reaction Environments. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2014, 592, 355–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cplett.2013.12.038

    2014 doi

  19. [27]

    In Situ Chemoresistive Sensing in the Environmental TEM: Probing Functional Devices and their Nanoscale Morphology

    Steinhauer, S.; Vernieres, J.; Krainer, J.; Köck, A.; Grammatikopoulos, P.; Sowwan, M. In Situ Chemoresistive Sensing in the Environmental TEM: Probing Functional Devices and their Nanoscale Morphology. Nanoscale 2017, 9, 7380–7384. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6NR09322A

    2017 doi

  20. [28]

    Thermal Oxidation of Size-Selected Pd Nanoparticles Supported on CuO Nanowires: The Role of the CuO–Pd Interface

    Steinhauer, S.; Zhao, J.; Singh, V.; Pavloudis, T.; Kioseoglou, J.; Nordlund, K.; Djurabekova, F.; Grammatikopoulos, P.; Sowwan, M. Thermal Oxidation of Size-Selected Pd Nanoparticles Supported on CuO Nanowires: The Role of the CuO–Pd Interface. Chem. Mater. 2017, 29, 6153–616...

    2017 doi

  21. [29]

    Machine Learning in Electron Microscopy for Advanced Nanocharacterization: Current Developments, Available Tools and Future Outlook

    Botifoll, M.; et al. Machine Learning in Electron Microscopy for Advanced Nanocharacterization: Current Developments, Available Tools and Future Outlook. Nanoscale Horiz. 2022, 7, 1427–1477. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2NH00377E

    2022 doi

  22. [30]

    Dynamic Wet-ETEM Observation of Pt/C Electrode Catalysts in a Moisturized Cathode Atmosphere

    Yoshida, K.; et al. Dynamic Wet-ETEM Observation of Pt/C Electrode Catalysts in a Moisturized Cathode Atmosphere. Nanotechnology 2014, 25, 425702. https://doi.org/10.1088/0957- 4484/25/42/425702

    2014 doi

  23. [31]

    Y.; Ferrando, R.; Slater, T

    Dearg, M.; Roncaglia, C.; Nelli, D.; El Koraychy, E. Y.; Ferrando, R.; Slater, T. J. A.; Palmer, R. E. Frame-by-Frame Observations of Structure Fluctuations in Single Mass-Selected Au Clusters using Aberration-Corrected Electron Microscopy. Nanoscale Horiz. 2024, 9, 143–147. h...

    2024 doi

  24. [32]

    Ede, J. M. Review: Deep Learning in Electron Microscopy. Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 2020, arXiv:2009.08328. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2009.08328

    2020 doi arXiv

  25. [33]

    P.; Niu, Y.; Palmer, R

    Dearg, M.; Hoddinott, H. P.; Niu, Y.; Palmer, R. E.; Slater, T. J. A. Classification of Metal Nanoclusters using Convolutional Neural Networks. Microsc. Microanal. 2022, 28, 3000–3001. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1431927622011230

    2022 doi

  26. [34]

    V.; et al

    Kalinin, S. V.; et al. Machine Learning in Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy. Nat. Rev. Methods Primers 2022, 2, 11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-022-00095-w

    2022 doi

  27. [35]

    V.; et al

    Kalinin, S. V.; et al. Deep Learning for Electron and Scanning Probe Microscopy. MRS Bull. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1557/s43577-022-00413-3 45

    2022 doi

  28. [36]

    D.; Torr, P.; Helveg, S.; Eliasson, H

    Channing, G.; Keller, D.; Rossell, M. D.; Torr, P.; Helveg, S.; Eliasson, H. Contrastive Image– Metadata Pre-Training for Materials Transmission Electron Microscopy. arXiv 2026, arXiv:2604.24909. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.24909

    2026 doi arXiv

  29. [37]

    A Survey of AI for Materials Science: Foundation Models, LLM Agents, Datasets, and Tools

    Van et al. A Survey of AI for Materials Science: Foundation Models, LLM Agents, Datasets, and Tools. arXiv 2025, arXiv:2506.20743v1. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2506.20743

    2025 doi arXiv

  30. [38]

    Morphology Prediction of Small Nanoparticles in Any Orientation from Single Electron Micrographs

    Eliasson et al. Morphology Prediction of Small Nanoparticles in Any Orientation from Single Electron Micrographs. npj Comput. Mater. 2026. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-026-02114-w

    2026 doi

  31. [39]

    P.; Famiani, S.; Sergides, A.; Lari, L.; Lloyd, D

    LaGrow, A. P.; Famiani, S.; Sergides, A.; Lari, L.; Lloyd, D. C.; Takahashi, M.; Maenosono, S.; Boyes, E. D.; Gai, P. L.; Thanh, N. T. K. Environmental STEM Study of the Oxidation Mechanism for Iron and Iron Carbide Nanoparticles. Materials 2022, 15, 1557. https://doi.org/10.3...

    2022 doi

  32. [40]

    DetectNano: Deep Learning-Based Detection and Characterization of Nanoparticles in Electron Microscopy Images

    Ferji, K. DetectNano: Deep Learning-Based Detection and Characterization of Nanoparticles in Electron Microscopy Images. Nanoscale 2025, 17, 18777-18786. https://doi.org/10.1039/D5NR02446C

    2025 doi

  33. [41]

    Lari, L.; Steinhauer, S.; Lazarov, V. K. In Situ TEM Oxidation Study of Fe Thin-Film Transformation to Single-Crystal Magnetite Nanoparticles. J. Mater. Sci. 2020, 55, 12897–12905. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-020-04917-8

    2020 doi

  34. [42]

    E.; Slater, T

    Dearg, M.; Lethbridge, S.; McCormack, J.; Palmer, R. E.; Slater, T. J. A. Characterisation of the Morphology of Surface-Assembled Au Nanoclusters on Amorphous Carbon. Nanoscale 2024, 16, 10827– 10832. https://doi.org/10.1039/D4NR00978A

    2024 doi

  35. [43]

    P.; Welling, M

    Kingma, D. P.; Welling, M. Auto-Encoding Variational Bayes. arXiv 2013, arXiv:1312.6114. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1312.6114

    2013 doi arXiv

  36. [44]

    Y.; Young, N

    Li, Z. Y.; Young, N. P.; Di Vece, M.; Palomba, S.; Palmer, R. E.; Bleloch, A. L.; Curley, B. C.; Johnston, R. L.; Jiang, J.; Yuan, J. Three-Dimensional Atomic-Scale Structure of Size-Selected Gold Nanoclusters. Nature 2008, 451, 46–48. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06470

    2008 doi

  37. [45]

    A.; Dunin-Borkowski, R

    Midgley, P. A.; Dunin-Borkowski, R. E. Electron Tomography and Holography in Materials Science. Nat. Mater. 2009, 8, 271–280. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat2406

    2009 doi

  38. [48]

    V.; et al

    Kalinin, S. V.; et al. Machine Learning for Automated Experimentation in Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy. npj Comput. Mater. 2023, 9, 227. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-023-01142-0

    2023 doi

  39. [49]

    T.; Davies, D

    Butler, K. T.; Davies, D. W.; Cartwright, H.; Isayev, O.; Walsh, A. Machine Learning for Molecular and Materials Science. Nature 2018, 559, 547–555. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0337-2

    2018 doi

  40. [50]

    Bishop, C. M. Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning; Springer: New York, 2006. 46

    2006

  41. [51]

    Support-Vector Networks

    Cortes, C.; Vapnik, V. Support-Vector Networks. Mach. Learn. 1995, 20, 273–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00994018

    1995 doi

  42. [52]

    Random Forests

    Breiman, L. Random Forests. Mach. Learn. 2001, 45, 5–32. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324

    2001 doi

  43. [53]

    Gradient-Based Learning Applied to Document Recognition

    LeCun, Y.; Bottou, L.; Bengio, Y.; Haffner, P. Gradient-Based Learning Applied to Document Recognition. Proc. IEEE 1998, 86, 2278–2324. https://doi.org/10.1109/5.726791

    1998 doi

  44. [54]

    Krizhevsky, A.; Sutskever, I.; Hinton, G. E. ImageNet Classification with Deep Convolutional Neural Networks. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 2012, 25. https://doi.org/10.1145/3065386

    2012 doi

  45. [56]

    U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation

    Ronneberger, O.; Fischer, P.; Brox, T. U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation. In Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention (MICCAI); 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24574-4_28

    2015 doi

  46. [57]

    Quantitative Analysis of Liquid-Phase Transmission Electron Microscopy Experiments Using Deep Learning

    Sun, Y.; et al. Quantitative Analysis of Liquid-Phase Transmission Electron Microscopy Experiments Using Deep Learning. Nanoscale 2024, 6, 2945-2954. https://doi.org/10.1039/D3NR04480G

    2024 doi

  47. [58]

    Advancing Electron Microscopy Using Deep Learning: Recent Progress and Future Directions

    Chen, Y.; et al. Advancing Electron Microscopy Using Deep Learning: Recent Progress and Future Directions. Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 2024, 7, 2, 022001. https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7639/ad229b

    2024 doi

  48. [59]

    Recent Developments and Perspectives of Ti-Based Transition Metal Carbides/Nitrides for Photocatalytic Applications: A Critical Review

    Fan, Z.; et al. Recent Developments and Perspectives of Ti-Based Transition Metal Carbides/Nitrides for Photocatalytic Applications: A Critical Review. Mater. Today 2024, 76, 110-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mattod.2024.05.003

    2024 doi

  49. [60]

    An Interpretable and Transferrable Vision Transformer Model for Rapid Materials Spectra Classification

    Chen, X.; et al. An Interpretable and Transferrable Vision Transformer Model for Rapid Materials Spectra Classification. Digital Discovery 2024, 3, 369–380. https://doi.org/10.1039/D3DD00198A

    2024 doi

  50. [61]

    A Machine Learning Model for Textured X-Ray Scattering and Diffraction Image Denoising

    Zhou, Y.; et al. A Machine Learning Model for Textured X-Ray Scattering and Diffraction Image Denoising. npj Comput. Mater. 2023, 9, 58. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-023-01011-y

    2023 doi

  51. [62]

    Efficient and Robust Automated Segmentation of Nanoparticles and Aggregates from Transmission Electron Microscopy Images with Highly Complex Backgrounds

    Zhou, X.; et al. Efficient and Robust Automated Segmentation of Nanoparticles and Aggregates from Transmission Electron Microscopy Images with Highly Complex Backgrounds. Nanomaterials 2024, 14,

    2024

  52. [63]

    https://doi.org/10.3390/nano14141169

    doi

  53. [64]

    Deep Learning Detection of Nanoparticles and Multiple Object Tracking of their Dynamic Evolution during In Situ ETEM Studies

    Faraz, M.; et al. Deep Learning Detection of Nanoparticles and Multiple Object Tracking of their Dynamic Evolution during In Situ ETEM Studies. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 2484. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-06308-2

    2022 doi

  54. [65]

    Enhancing Semantic Segmentation in High-Resolution TEM Images: A Comparative Study of Batch Normalization and Instance Normalization

    Kazimi, E.; et al. Enhancing Semantic Segmentation in High-Resolution TEM Images: A Comparative Study of Batch Normalization and Instance Normalization. Microsc. Microanal. 2025, 31, ozae093. https://doi.org/10.1093/mam/ozae093

    2025 doi

  55. [66]

    Automated Nanoparticle Segmentation and Characterization Pipeline for Electron Microscopy

    Day, A.; et al. Automated Nanoparticle Segmentation and Characterization Pipeline for Electron Microscopy. Sci. Rep. 2025, 15, 17180. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-01337-z 47

    2025 doi

  56. [67]

    Self-Supervised Learning for Analysis of Liquid-Phase Transmission Electron Microscopy Data

    Kim, J.; et al. Self-Supervised Learning for Analysis of Liquid-Phase Transmission Electron Microscopy Data. Sci. Adv. 2025, 11, 14. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.ads5552

    2025 doi

  57. [68]

    AI-Assisted Design of Advanced Polymeric Materials: Challenges and Solutions

    Gao, Y.; et al. AI-Assisted Design of Advanced Polymeric Materials: Challenges and Solutions. Adv. Mater. 2025, 38, e202516857. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202516857

    2025 doi

  58. [69]

    I.; Haigh, S

    Kirkland, A. I.; Haigh, S. J. Exit Wavefunction Reconstruction in Transmission Electron Microscopy. In: Advanced Computing in Electron Microscopy, 2nd ed.; Springer: New York, 2009

    2009

  59. [70]

    J.; Yang, Q

    Pan, S. J.; Yang, Q. A Survey on Transfer Learning. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 2010, 22, 1345–

    2010

  60. [71]

    https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2009.191

    2009 doi

  61. [72]

    P.; et al

    Treder, K. P.; et al. Applications of Deep Learning in Electron Microscopy. Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 2022, 71(Supplement_1):i100-i115. PMID: 35275181. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmicro/dfab043

    2022 doi

  62. [73]

    You Only Look Once: Unified, Real-Time Object Detection

    Redmon, J.; Divvala, S.; Girshick, R.; Farhadi, A. You Only Look Once: Unified, Real-Time Object Detection. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR); 2016. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2016.91

    2016 doi

  63. [74]

    Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networks

    Ren, S.; He, K.; Girshick, R.; Sun, J. Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networks. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 2017, 39, 1137–1149. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2016.2577031

    2017 doi

  64. [75]

    C.; et al

    Schloz, M.; Müller, J.; Pekin, T. C.; et al. Deep Reinforcement Learning for Data-Driven Adaptive Scanning in Ptychography. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 8732. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-35740-1

    2023 doi

  65. [76]

    Mask R-CNN

    He, K.; Gkioxari, G.; Dollár, P.; Girshick, R. Mask R-CNN. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV); 2017. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCV.2017.322

    2017 doi

  66. [77]

    E.; Baum, D.; Doya, K.; Economo, E

    Toulkeridou, E.; Gutierrez, C. E.; Baum, D.; Doya, K.; Economo, E. P. Automated Segmentation of Insect Anatomy from Micro-CT Images using Deep Learning. Nat. Sci. 2023, 3, e20230010. https://doi.org/10.1002/ntls.20230010

    2023 doi

  67. [78]

    Segment Anything

    Kirillov, A.; et al. Segment Anything. arXiv 2023, arXiv:2304.02643. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.02643

    2023 doi arXiv

  68. [79]

    Segment Anything in Medical Images

    Ma, J.; et al. Segment Anything in Medical Images. Nat. Commun. 2024, 15, 654. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-44824-z

    2024 doi

  69. [80]

    NP-SAM: Implementing the Segment Anything Model for Easy Nanoparticle Segmentation in Electron Microscopy Images

    Larsen, R.; et al. NP-SAM: Implementing the Segment Anything Model for Easy Nanoparticle Segmentation in Electron Microscopy Images. ChemRxiv 2023. https://doi.org/10.26434/chemrxiv-2023- k73qz

    2023 doi

  70. [81]

    Automated Particle Size Analysis of Supported Nanoparticle TEM Images Using a Pre-Trained SAM Model

    Zhong, X.; Liang, G.; Meng, L.; Xi, W.; Gu, L.; Tian, N.; Zhai, Y.; He, Y.; Huang, Y.; Jin, F.; et al. Automated Particle Size Analysis of Supported Nanoparticle TEM Images Using a Pre-Trained SAM Model. Nanomaterials 2025, 15, 1886. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano15241886

    2025 doi

  71. [82]

    nnU-Net: A Self-Configuring Method for Deep Learning-Based Biomedical Image Segmentation

    Isensee, F.; et al. nnU-Net: A Self-Configuring Method for Deep Learning-Based Biomedical Image Segmentation. Nat. Methods 2021, 18, 203–211. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-020-01008-z 48

    2021 doi

  72. [83]

    Machine Learning in Electron Microscopy Data Analysis

    Yao, L.; Chen, Q. Machine Learning in Electron Microscopy Data Analysis. In: Electron Microscopy Methods and Protocols; Elsevier, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-85796-3.00010-X

    2022 doi

  73. [84]

    Reconstructing the Exit Wave of 2D Materials in High-Resolution Transmission Electron Microscopy Using Machine Learning

    Larsen, R.; et al. Reconstructing the Exit Wave of 2D Materials in High-Resolution Transmission Electron Microscopy Using Machine Learning. Ultramicroscopy 2023, 244, 113641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2022.113641

    2023 doi

  74. [85]

    Quantifying Noise Limitations of Neural Network Segmentations in High- Resolution Transmission Electron Microscopy

    Larsen, R.; et al. Quantifying Noise Limitations of Neural Network Segmentations in High- Resolution Transmission Electron Microscopy. Ultramicroscopy 2023, 253, 113803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2023.113803

    2023 doi

  75. [86]

    Deep-Learning-Enabled Strain Mapping of Single-Atom Defects in Two-Dimensional Transition Metal Dichalcogenides with Sub-Picometer Precision

    Lee, J.; Kwon, D.; Kim, J.; et al. Deep-Learning-Enabled Strain Mapping of Single-Atom Defects in Two-Dimensional Transition Metal Dichalcogenides with Sub-Picometer Precision. Nano Lett. 2020, 20, 2964–2970. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.0c00269

    2020 doi

  76. [87]

    D.; et al

    Ortega, E.; Nicholls, D.; Browning, N. D.; et al. High Temporal-Resolution Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy Using Sparse-Serpentine Scan Pathways. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 22722. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-02052-1

    2021 doi

  77. [88]

    Stevens, A.; Yang, H.; Carin, L.; Arslan, I.; Browning, N. D. The Potential for Bayesian Compressive Sensing to Significantly Reduce Electron Dose in High-Resolution STEM Images. J. Microsc. 2014, 255, 66–77. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmicro/dft042

    2014 doi

  78. [89]

    Peters, J. J. P.; Mullarkey, T.; Hedley, E.; et al. Electron Counting Detectors in Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy via Hardware Signal Processing. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 5184. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-40875-w

    2023 doi

  79. [90]

    Buades, A.; Coll, B.; Morel, J. M. A Non-Local Algorithm for Image Denoising. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR); 2005; 2, 60–65. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2005.38

    2005 doi

  80. [91]

    C.; Woods, R

    Gonzalez, R. C.; Woods, R. E. Digital Image Processing, 4th ed.; Pearson: Boston, MA, USA, 2018

    2018

  81. [92]

    M.; Beanland, R

    Ede, J. M.; Beanland, R. Improving Electron Micrographs with Deep Learning. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10,

    2020

  82. [93]

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-65261-0

    doi

  83. [94]

    C.; Sheikh, H

    Wang, Z.; Bovik, A. C.; Sheikh, H. R.; Simoncelli, E. P. Image Quality Assessment: From Error Visibility to Structural Similarity. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 2004, 13, 600–612. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2003.819861

    2004 doi

  84. [95]

    Fourier Shell Correlation Threshold Criteria

    van Heel, M.; Schatz, M. Fourier Shell Correlation Threshold Criteria. J. Struct. Biol. 2005, 151, 250–

    2005

  85. [96]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsb.2005.05.009

    2005 doi

  86. [97]

    T.; Nellist, P

    Gao, S.; Wang, P.; Zhang, F.; Martinez, G. T.; Nellist, P. D.; Pan, X.; Kirkland, A. I. Electron Ptychographic Microscopy for Three-Dimensional Imaging. Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 163. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-00150-1

    2017 doi

  87. [98]

    Generative Adversarial Nets

    Goodfellow, I.; Pouget-Abadie, J.; Mirza, M.; Xu, B.; Warde-Farley, D.; Ozair, S.; Courville, A.; Bengio, Y. Generative Adversarial Nets. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems - Volume 2 (NIPS'14), 2014 Vol. 2. MIT Press, ...

    2014

  88. [99]

    Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Models

    Ho, J.; Jain, A.; Abbeel, P. Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Models. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 2020, Curran Associates, Inc. Larochelle, Ranzato, Hadsell, Balcan & Lin, editors, 33, 6840–6851

    2020

  89. [100]

    Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learning

    Gal, Y.; Ghahramani, Z. Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learning. In Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML); 2016; 1050–1059. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1506.02142

    2016 doi arXiv

  90. [101]

    R.; et al

    Abdar, M.; Pourpanah, F.; Hussain, S.; Rezazadegan, D.; Liu, L.; Ghavamzadeh, M.; Fieguth, P.; Cao, X.; Khosravi, A.; Acharya, U. R.; et al. A Review of Uncertainty Quantification in Deep Learning: Techniques, Applications and Challenges. Inf. Fusion 2021, 76, 243–297. https:/...

    2021 doi

  91. [102]

    Convolutional LSTM Network: A Machine Learning Approach for Precipitation Nowcasting

    Shi, X.; Chen, Z.; Wang, H.; Yeung, D.-Y.; Wong, W.-K.; Woo, W.-C. Convolutional LSTM Network: A Machine Learning Approach for Precipitation Nowcasting. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 2015, 28

    2015

  92. [103]

    Is Space-Time Attention All You Need for Video Understanding? In Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML)

    Bertasius, G.; Wang, H.; Torresani, L. Is Space-Time Attention All You Need for Video Understanding? In Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML)

  93. [104]

    https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2102.05095

    doi arXiv

  94. [105]

    V.; Xue, D.; Yuan, R

    Lookman, T.; Balachandran, P. V.; Xue, D.; Yuan, R. Active Learning in Materials Science with Emphasis on Adaptive Sampling Using Uncertainties. npj Comput. Mater. 2019, 5, 21. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-019-0153-8

    2019 doi

  95. [106]

    Evaluating Multiple Object Tracking Performance: The CLEAR MOT Metrics

    Bernardin, K.; Stiefelhagen, R. Evaluating Multiple Object Tracking Performance: The CLEAR MOT Metrics. EURASIP J. Image Video Process. 2008, Article 246309. https://doi.org/10.1155/2008/246309

    2008 doi

  96. [107]

    Inverse Molecular Design Using Machine Learning

    Sanchez-Lengeling, B.; Aspuru-Guzik, A. Inverse Molecular Design Using Machine Learning. Science 2018, 361, 360–365. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aat2663

    2018 doi

  97. [108]

    Active Learning Literature Survey; University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, WI, USA, 2009

    Settles, B. Active Learning Literature Survey; University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, WI, USA, 2009

    2009

  98. [109]

    An Event-Driven Multi-Agent Workflow for Microscopy Data Analysis Using the Model Context Protocol

    Zhao, M.; Gladyshev, A.; Shabih, S.; et al. An Event-Driven Multi-Agent Workflow for Microscopy Data Analysis Using the Model Context Protocol. Research Square Preprint 2026. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9158958/v1

    2026 doi

  99. [110]

    Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognition

    Simonyan, K.; Zisserman, A. Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognition. arXiv 2014, arXiv:1409.1556. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1409.1556

    2014 doi arXiv

  100. [111]

    Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition

    He, K.; Zhang, X.; Ren, S.; Sun, J. Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR); 2016, 770–778. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2016.90

    2016 doi

  101. [112]

    Huang, G.; Liu, Z.; van der Maaten, L.; Weinberger, K. Q. Densely Connected Convolutional Networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR); 2017, 4700–4708. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2017.243 50

    2017 doi

  102. [113]

    Tan, M.; Le, Q. V. EfficientNet: Rethinking Model Scaling for Convolutional Neural Networks. In Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML); 2019, 6105–6114. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1905.11946

    2019 doi arXiv

  103. [114]

    Focal Loss for Dense Object Detection

    Lin, T.-Y.; Goyal, P.; Girshick, R.; He, K.; Dollár, P. Focal Loss for Dense Object Detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV); 2017, 2980–2988. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCV.2017.324

    2017 doi

  104. [115]

    End-to-End Object Detection with Transformers

    Carion, N.; Massa, F.; Synnaeve, G.; Usunier, N.; Kirillov, A.; Zagoruyko, S. End-to-End Object Detection with Transformers. In Computer Vision – ECCV 2020; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020, 213–229. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58452-8_13

    2020 doi

  105. [116]

    Zhou, Z.; Siddiquee, M. M. R.; Tajbakhsh, N.; Liang, J. UNet++: A Nested U-Net Architecture for Medical Image Segmentation. In Deep Learning in Medical Image Analysis and Multimodal Learning for Clinical Decision Support; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018, 3–11. https://doi.or...

    2018 doi

  106. [117]

    Encoder–Decoder with Atrous Separable Convolution for Semantic Image Segmentation

    Chen, L.-C.; Zhu, Y.; Papandreou, G.; Schroff, F.; Adam, H. Encoder–Decoder with Atrous Separable Convolution for Semantic Image Segmentation. arXiv 2018, arXiv:1802.02611. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1802.02611

    2018 doi arXiv

  107. [118]

    An Image Is Worth 16×16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scale

    Dosovitskiy, A.; Beyer, L.; Kolesnikov, A.; et al. An Image Is Worth 16×16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scale. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2010.11929. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2010.11929

    2020 doi arXiv

  108. [119]

    Training Data-Efficient Image Transformers and Distillation Through Attention

    Touvron, H.; Cord, M.; Douze, M.; Massa, F.; Sablayrolles, A.; Jégou, H. Training Data-Efficient Image Transformers and Distillation Through Attention. In Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML); 2021. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2012.12877

    2021 doi arXiv

  109. [120]

    Swin Transformer: Hierarchical Vision Transformer Using Shifted Windows

    Liu, Z.; Lin, Y.; Cao, Y.; et al. Swin Transformer: Hierarchical Vision Transformer Using Shifted Windows. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV); 2021, 9992–10002. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCV48922.2021.00986

    2021 doi

  110. [121]

    Segmenter: Transformer for Semantic Segmentation

    Strudel, R.; Garcia, R.; Laptev, I.; Schmid, C. Segmenter: Transformer for Semantic Segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV); 2021, 7262–7272. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCV48922.2021.00719

    2021 doi

  111. [122]

    A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representations

    Chen, T.; Kornblith, S.; Norouzi, M.; Hinton, G. A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representations. In Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML); 2020, 1597–1607. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2002.05709

    2020 doi arXiv

  112. [123]

    Emerging Properties in Self-Supervised Vision Transformers

    Caron, M.; Touvron, H.; Misra, I.; Jégou, H.; Mairal, J.; Bojanowski, P.; Joulin, A. Emerging Properties in Self-Supervised Vision Transformers. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV); 2021, 9650–9660. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2104.14294

    2021 doi arXiv

  113. [124]

    Masked Autoencoders Are Scalable Vision Learners

    He, K.; Chen, X.; Xie, S.; Li, Y.; Dollár, P.; Girshick, R. Masked Autoencoders Are Scalable Vision Learners. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR); 2022, 16000–16009. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2111.06377 51

    2022 doi arXiv

  114. [125]

    Generative Adversarial Networks

    Goodfellow, I.; Pouget-Abadie, J.; Mirza, M.; Xu, B.; Warde-Farley, D.; Ozair, S.; Courville, A.; Bengio, Y. Generative Adversarial Networks. Commun. ACM 2020, 63, 139–144. https://doi.org/10.1145/3422622

    2020 doi

  115. [126]

    Zhu, J.-Y.; Park, T.; Isola, P.; Efros, A. A. Unpaired Image-to-Image Translation Using Cycle- Consistent Adversarial Networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV); 2017, 2223–2232. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCV.2017.244

    2017 doi

  116. [127]

    High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion Models

    Rombach, R.; Blattmann, A.; Lorenz, D.; Esser, P.; Ommer, B. High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion Models. CVPR 2022. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR52688.2022.01042

    2022 doi

  117. [128]

    W.; Hallacy, C.; Ramesh, A.; Goh, G.; Agarwal, S.; Sastry, G.; Askell, A.; Mishkin, P.; Clark, J.; et al

    Radford, A.; Kim, J. W.; Hallacy, C.; Ramesh, A.; Goh, G.; Agarwal, S.; Sastry, G.; Askell, A.; Mishkin, P.; Clark, J.; et al. Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervision. In Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML);...

    2021 doi arXiv

  118. [129]

    Human-Level Control through Deep Reinforcement Learning

    Mnih, V.; Kavukcuoglu, K.; Silver, D.; et al. Human-Level Control through Deep Reinforcement Learning. Nature 2015, 518, 529–533. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14236

    2015 doi

  119. [130]

    B.; Jesse, S.; Kalinin, S

    Maksov, A.; Dyck, O.; Wang, K.; Xiao, K.; Geohegan, D. B.; Jesse, S.; Kalinin, S. V.; Ziatdinov, M. Deep Learning Analysis of Defect and Phase Evolution During Electron Beam Induced Transformations. npj Comput. Mater. 2019, 5, 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-019-0152-9

    2019 doi

  120. [131]

    Fast and Interpretable Classification of Small X-ray Diffraction Datasets Using Data Augmentation and Deep Neural Networks

    Oviedo, F.; Ren, Z.; Sun, S.; et al. Fast and Interpretable Classification of Small X-ray Diffraction Datasets Using Data Augmentation and Deep Neural Networks. npj Comput. Mater. 2019, 5, 60. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-019-0196-x

    2019 doi

  121. [132]

    Applying Deep Learning in Automatic and Rapid Measurement of Lattice Spacings in HRTEM Images

    Zhu, Y.; et al. Applying Deep Learning in Automatic and Rapid Measurement of Lattice Spacings in HRTEM Images. Sci. China Mater. 2020, 63, 2365–2370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40843-020-1368-7

    2020 doi

  122. [133]

    P.; et al

    Horwath, J. P.; et al. Understanding Important Features of Deep Learning Models for Segmentation of High-Resolution Transmission Electron Microscopy Images. npj Comput. Mater. 2020, 6, 108. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-020-00363-x

    2020 doi

  123. [134]

    Ede, J. M. Exit-Wave Reconstruction and Electron Microscopy Enhancement Using Deep Learning. Zenodo 2020. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.4399748

    2020 doi

  124. [135]

    Analysis of TEM Images of Metallic Nanoparticles Using Convolutional Neural Networks and Transfer Learning

    Koyama, T.; et al. Analysis of TEM Images of Metallic Nanoparticles Using Convolutional Neural Networks and Transfer Learning. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2021, 538, 168225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmmm.2021.168225

    2021 doi

  125. [136]

    A Deep Learning Based Automatic Defect Analysis Framework for In Situ TEM Ion Irradiations

    Shen, Y.; et al. A Deep Learning Based Automatic Defect Analysis Framework for In Situ TEM Ion Irradiations. Comput. Mater. Sci. 2021, 197, 110560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2021.110560

    2021 doi

  126. [137]

    Neural Network Analysis of Electron Microscopy Video Data Reveals the Temperature-Driven Microphase Dynamics in the Ions/Water System

    Kashin, M.; et al. Neural Network Analysis of Electron Microscopy Video Data Reveals the Temperature-Driven Microphase Dynamics in the Ions/Water System. Small 2021, 17, 2007726. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.202007726

    2021 doi

  127. [138]

    Precisely Identify the Geometry of Catalyst Particles from S/TEM Images via a Boundary Attention Deep Learning Network

    Liu, Y.; et al. Precisely Identify the Geometry of Catalyst Particles from S/TEM Images via a Boundary Attention Deep Learning Network. Mater. Today Commun. 2021, 28, 102728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2021.102728 52

    2021 doi

  128. [139]

    Rapid and Flexible Segmentation of Electron Microscopy Data Using Few-Shot Machine Learning

    Akers, I.; et al. Rapid and Flexible Segmentation of Electron Microscopy Data Using Few-Shot Machine Learning. npj Comput. Mater. 2021, 7, 187. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-021-00652-z

    2021 doi

  129. [140]

    A Deep Learning-Based Framework for Automatic Analysis of the Nanoparticle Morphology in SEM/TEM Images

    Sun, J.; et al. A Deep Learning-Based Framework for Automatic Analysis of the Nanoparticle Morphology in SEM/TEM Images. Nanoscale 2022, 14, 10761–10772. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2NR01029A

    2022 doi

  130. [141]

    STEM Image Analysis Based on Deep Learning: Identification of Vacancy Defects and Polymorphs of MoS₂

    Lee, J.; et al. STEM Image Analysis Based on Deep Learning: Identification of Vacancy Defects and Polymorphs of MoS₂. Nano Lett. 2022, 22, 4677–4685. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.2c00550

    2022 doi

  131. [142]

    Cha, E.; Chung, H.; Jang, J.; Lee, J.; Lee, E.; Ye, J. C. Low-Dose Sparse-View HAADF-STEM- EDX Tomography of Nanocrystals Using Unsupervised Deep Learning. ACS Nano 2022, 16, 10314– 10326. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.2c00168

    2022 doi

  132. [143]

    Deep Learning for Mapping Element Distribution of High-Entropy Alloys in Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy Images

    Ragone, M.; et al. Deep Learning for Mapping Element Distribution of High-Entropy Alloys in Scanning Transmission Electron Microscopy Images. Comput. Mater. Sci. 2022, 201, 110905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2021.110905

    2022 doi

  133. [144]

    H.; Wang, C

    Cheng, Z. H.; Wang, C. L.; Wu, X.; Chu, J. H. Review In Situ Transmission Electron Microscope with Machine Learning. J. Semicond. 2022, 43, 081001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-4926/43/8/081001

    2022 doi

  134. [145]

    P.; et al

    Treder, K. P.; et al. nNPipe: Automated Segmentation and Morphological Analysis of Nanoparticles in Catalytic Systems. npj Comput. Mater. 2023, 9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-022-00949-7

    2023 doi

  135. [146]

    A.; et al

    Kulesh, N. A.; et al. Data-Driven Optimization of FePt Heat-Assisted Magnetic Recording Media Accelerated by Deep Learning TEM Image Segmentation. Acta Mater. 2023, 255, 119039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2023.119039

    2023 doi

  136. [147]

    Deep-Learning-Assisted Analysis of High-Resolution TEM Images of Nanoparticles

    Zhu, X.; et al. Deep-Learning-Assisted Analysis of High-Resolution TEM Images of Nanoparticles. Nanoscale 2023, 15. https://doi.org/10.1039/D3NR03061J

    2023 doi

  137. [148]

    Deep Learning Modeling in Microscopy Imaging: A Review of Materials Science Applications

    Ragone, M.; et al. Deep Learning Modeling in Microscopy Imaging: A Review of Materials Science Applications. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2023, 138, 101165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmatsci.2023.101165

    2023 doi

  138. [149]

    Deep Learning Analysis of Single-Molecule Dynamics in Liquid-Phase Transmission Electron Microscopy

    Cheng, H.; et al. Deep Learning Analysis of Single-Molecule Dynamics in Liquid-Phase Transmission Electron Microscopy. Chem. Commun. 2023, 59. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2CC05354C

    2023 doi

  139. [150]

    M.; Britz, D.; Engstler, M.; Fritz, M.; Mücklich, F

    Azimi, S. M.; Britz, D.; Engstler, M.; Fritz, M.; Mücklich, F. Advanced Steel Microstructural Classification by Deep Learning Methods. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 2128. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018- 20037-5

    2018 doi

  140. [151]

    DDDNet: A Deep Learning Framework for Electron Microscopy Image Segmentation

    Wang, Y.; et al. DDDNet: A Deep Learning Framework for Electron Microscopy Image Segmentation. J. Appl. Phys. 2024, 136. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0228023

    2024 doi

  141. [152]

    Moreira, H.; et al. Ag Surface Segregation in Sub-10-nm Bimetallic AuAg Nanoparticles Quantified by STEM-EDS and Machine Learning: Implications for Fine-Tuning Physicochemical Properties for Plasmonics and Catalysis Applications. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 2024, 7, 1369–1378. https...

    2024 doi

  142. [153]

    When Machine Learning Meets 2D Materials: A Review

    Lu, Y.; et al. When Machine Learning Meets 2D Materials: A Review. Adv. Sci. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202305277 53

    2024 doi

  143. [154]

    Unlocking 3D Nanoparticle Shapes from 2D HRTEM Images: A Deep Learning Breakthrough

    Moreau, R.; Amara, H.; Moreaud, M.; Nelayah, J.; Moncomble, A.; et al. Unlocking 3D Nanoparticle Shapes from 2D HRTEM Images: A Deep Learning Breakthrough. In Proceedings of the 17th European Microscopy Congress (EMC 2024); Copenhagen, Denmark, August 2024; BIO Web Conf. 2024,...

    2024 doi

  144. [155]

    High-Precision Automated Nanoparticle Segmentation Using a Deep Learning Framework with Boundary-Aware and Attention Networks

    Han, X.; Jin, L.; Zhong, Y.; Guo, C. High-Precision Automated Nanoparticle Segmentation Using a Deep Learning Framework with Boundary-Aware and Attention Networks. AI Mater. 2026, 2, 0006. https://doi.org/10.55092/aimat20260006

    2026 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed July 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.