Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 48 references

UniEM-3M: A Universal Electron Micrograph Dataset for Microstructural Segmentation and Generation

T0 review · 4 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper introduces UniEM-3M, a dataset of 5,091 electron micrographs with about three million instance segmentation labels and text descriptions, plus a segmentation baseline and a text-to-image model trained on the full collection.

desk verdict Potentially useful dataset that deserves peer review, but the abstract alone cannot support the benchmark claims; partial release and missing annotation details need scrutiny. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.16239 v1 pith:PCQDTSBJ submitted 2025-08-22 cs.CV

Nan wang , Zhiyi Xia , Yiming Li , Shi Tang , Zuxin Fan , Xi Fang , Haoyi Tao , Xiaochen Cai
show 3 more authors
Guolin Ke Linfeng Zhang Yanhui Hong
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords electronmicroscopyinstancesegmentationmicrostructuralcharacterizationdatasettext-to-imagediffusionmaterialssciencebenchmarkmicrograph
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

UniEM-3M is presented as the first large-scale, multimodal electron-micrograph dataset built for instance-level understanding. It contains 5,091 high-resolution electron micrographs, roughly three million pixel-level instance segmentation labels, and image-level textual descriptions with disentangled attributes. Alongside the dataset, the authors release a text-to-image diffusion model trained on the entire collection, intended both as a data-augmentation tool and as a stand-in for the full data distribution, and a benchmark comparing representative instance segmentation methods. On that benchmark, their flow-based model UniEM-Net is reported to outperform other advanced methods. If the resource is as representative as claimed, it gives materials scientists a common testbed and a strong starting point for automated microstructural analysis.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the dataset itself: 5,091 high-resolution electron micrographs paired with about three million instance-level segmentation masks and image-level textual descriptions whose attributes are disentangled. A text-to-image diffusion model trained on the full collection supplies a generative proxy for the data distribution. UniEM-Net, a flow-based instance segmentation architecture, provides the benchmark's strong baseline.

What would settle it

Take a held-out set of electron micrographs from instrument types, materials, or imaging conditions not well represented in UniEM-3M and measure segmentation performance of a model trained on the dataset; if the drop is large relative to the within-dataset benchmark, the representativeness premise fails. An even simpler check is to compare the distribution of microstructural categories in UniEM-3M with a broad survey of published EM images.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the scarcity of large, diverse, expert-annotated EM datasets can be addressed by a single coordinated release: UniEM-3M, containing 5,091 high-resolution electron micrographs with about 3 million instance segmentation labels and attribute-disentangled textual descriptions. The paper also argues that a text-to-image diffusion model trained on the complete collection serves a dual role, as a data-augmentation engine and as a proxy for the full distribution when only part of the dataset is shared. To make the resource actionable, the authors benchmark several instance segmentation methods on the full dataset and introduce UniEM-Net, a flow-based model that they report

Load-bearing premise

The paper assumes that the 5,091 electron micrographs and their expert annotations are representative and unbiased across the diversity of microstructures that electron microscopy sees.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Researchers can train and compare instance segmentation models for microstructural features without assembling and annotating a new corpus from scratch.
  • The released diffusion model can generate synthetic electron micrographs, potentially expanding small or private datasets for model training.
  • Attribute-disentangled text descriptions open a route from natural-language microstructure description to segmentation and image generation.
  • The public benchmark gives the community a common evaluation protocol for EM instance segmentation, making method comparisons meaningful.
  • Even though only a subset of images is public, the generative model trained on all 5,091 images lets outside users probe the full distribution indirectly.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the dataset's coverage of instruments, materials, and microstructural motifs is broad enough, models pretrained on UniEM-3M may transfer to new EM settings with modest fine-tuning; this transfer is not demonstrated in the paper but is a natural extension.
  • Text-to-image generation conditioned on disentangled attributes could be used to test how each attribute (e.g., phase, defect type, morphology) influences segmentability, effectively turning the generative model into an analysis tool rather than just an augmentation tool.
  • The benchmark's validity rests on the label taxonomy and annotation protocol; a useful follow-up would be an independent inter-annotator agreement study on a random subset.
  • Because only a subset of the images is public, the 'proxy distribution' claim of the diffusion model is testable: generated samples can be compared against the private portion by a third party with access to both.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper announces UniEM-3M, described as the first large-scale, multimodal electron micrograph dataset for instance-level understanding. The claimed resource comprises 5,091 high-resolution EMs, roughly 3 million instance segmentation labels, and image-level attribute-disentangled textual descriptions, with only a subset to be publicly released. A text-to-image diffusion model trained on the full collection is released as a proxy for the data distribution, and a benchmark evaluates several instance segmentation methods on the complete dataset. The authors further propose UniEM-Net, a flow-based baseline, and report that it outperforms other advanced methods. The full text supplied for review is not legible; therefore this report is necessarily based primarily on the abstract and the released-data claims.

Significance. If the dataset, annotations, and benchmark are as described, UniEM-3M would be a substantial community resource for automated microstructural analysis. The release of a diffusion-model proxy as a data-augmentation tool is an interesting idea, and the inclusion of attribute-disentangled text could enable multimodal methods. The benchmark, if run on the complete dataset with meaningful baselines and quality controls, would be useful. However, the significance is currently contingent on evidence not visible in the abstract: annotation quality, release terms, dataset representativeness, and quantitative comparisons. The paper's own statement that only a subset of the dataset will be public weakens the verifiability of the central claims, because the benchmark results on the full private data cannot be independently reproduced.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract, first paragraph] The paper asserts about 3 million instance segmentation labels and 5,091 images, implying roughly 590 instances per image, but provides no annotation protocol, inter-annotator agreement, label-quality statistics, or description of how merged/split masks were handled. The benchmark conclusion and any downstream use depend on the reliability of these labels; with no quality evidence, the central data-quality premise is unsupported.
  2. [Abstract, third sentence] Only 'a subset' of UniEM-3M will be made publicly available, while the benchmark is evaluated on the complete dataset. The released diffusion model is a proxy for the image distribution, not for the instance labels, so it cannot be used to validate the missing ground truth. This makes the main empirical claims of dataset scale and benchmark ranking not independently testable from the announced release.
  3. [Abstract, last sentence] The claim that UniEM-Net 'outperforms other advanced methods' is stated without any reported metric, baseline list, statistical significance, or error bars. As presented, this is a claim about a benchmark whose data and annotation quality are not visible, so the reader cannot assess the magnitude or robustness of the reported improvement.
  4. [Abstract, first paragraph] The textual descriptions are described as 'attribute-disentangled,' but no validation protocol is given. It is not specified how disentanglement was ensured, whether the descriptions were expert-authored, or whether automatic or manual evaluation was performed. This is a load-bearing part of the claimed multimodal contribution.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract, second paragraph] The abstract alternates between 'a subset of which will be made publicly available' and 'multifaceted release of a partial dataset,' which is clearer, but the dataset name UniEM-3M may mislead readers into expecting the full 3M labels to be accessible. State explicitly which parts are released.
  2. [Abstract, first paragraph] The 'first large-scale' claim should be substantiated with a comparison to prior EM datasets; no references or dataset statistics are given in the abstract.
  3. [Full text] The supplied full text is not machine-readable in the version under review, so I could not consult the methods, experimental setup, or benchmark tables. If this is a rendering artifact, the authors should ensure the PDF/text is intact for reviewers; otherwise the paper lacks essential technical detail.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity identified; the dataset and benchmark claims are empirical and externally grounded.

full rationale

UniEM-3M is a dataset-and-benchmark paper, not a derivation chain. Its central claims are the construction of a large annotated EM dataset, the release of a diffusion model proxy, and comparative evaluation of instance segmentation methods on a benchmark. No equation is derived from a fitted input, no parameter is fitted to a subset and then renamed as a prediction, and no load-bearing self-citation or imported uniqueness theorem is detectable from the available text. The benchmark compares UniEM-Net against other methods on the complete UniEM-3M; while one could worry about train/test partitioning, the paper does not specify enough detail to exhibit a circular reduction, and the hard rule requires quoting the paper and showing that a result equals its input by construction. The reader's own assessment of circularity is 0, and the abstract's claims, while difficult to verify because the full text is corrupted and only a subset of data is public, are unfalsifiability concerns rather than circularity. Accordingly, the honest finding is no significant circularity, score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No equations or derivations appear in the abstract. The central claims rest on the quality and representativeness of the dataset, and on the diffusion model being a valid proxy for the data distribution.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Expert annotations in UniEM-3M are correct and consistent.
    The dataset's utility depends on annotation quality; stated implicitly in 'expert-annotated datasets.'
  • domain assumption The 5,091 electron micrographs are representative of the diversity of microstructures in real materials.
    Without representativeness, benchmark conclusions may not generalize; implicit in 'diverse.'
  • domain assumption Text-to-image diffusion model trained on the full dataset acts as a valid proxy for the data distribution.
    Abstract explicitly states the diffusion model is 'a proxy for the complete data distribution.'

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of UniEM-3M: A Universal Electron Micrograph Dataset for Microstructural Segmentation and Generation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PCQDTSBJ

@misc{pith2026250816239,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: UniEM-3M: A Universal Electron Micrograph Dataset for Microstructural Segmentation and Generation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PCQDTSBJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.16239}
}
read the original abstract

Quantitative microstructural characterization is fundamental to materials science, where electron micrograph (EM) provides indispensable high-resolution insights. However, progress in deep learning-based EM characterization has been hampered by the scarcity of large-scale, diverse, and expert-annotated datasets, due to acquisition costs, privacy concerns, and annotation complexity. To address this issue, we introduce UniEM-3M, the first large-scale and multimodal EM dataset for instance-level understanding. It comprises 5,091 high-resolution EMs, about 3 million instance segmentation labels, and image-level attribute-disentangled textual descriptions, a subset of which will be made publicly available. Furthermore, we are also releasing a text-to-image diffusion model trained on the entire collection to serve as both a powerful data augmentation tool and a proxy for the complete data distribution. To establish a rigorous benchmark, we evaluate various representative instance segmentation methods on the complete UniEM-3M and present UniEM-Net as a strong baseline model. Quantitative experiments demonstrate that this flow-based model outperforms other advanced methods on this challenging benchmark. Our multifaceted release of a partial dataset, a generative model, and a comprehensive benchmark -- available at huggingface -- will significantly accelerate progress in automated materials analysis.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter edition editor eid eprint howpublished institution isbn journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.a...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in capitalize " " * FUNCT...

  3. [3]

    L.; Almeida, D.; Altenschmidt, J.; Altman, S.; Anadkat, S.; et al

    Achiam, J.; Adler, S.; Agarwal, S.; Ahmad, L.; Akkaya, I.; Aleman, F. L.; Almeida, D.; Altenschmidt, J.; Altman, S.; Anadkat, S.; et al. 2023. Gpt-4 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774

    arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    H.; Cozzini, S.; Ciancio, R.; and Chiusole, A

    Aversa, R.; Modarres, M. H.; Cozzini, S.; Ciancio, R.; and Chiusole, A. 2018. The first annotated set of scanning electron microscopy images for nanoscience. Scientific data, 5(1): 1--10

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Bals, J.; and Epple, M. 2023 a . Artificial scanning electron microscopy images created by generative adversarial networks from simulated particle assemblies. Advanced Intelligent Systems, 5(7): 2300004

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Bals, J.; and Epple, M. 2023 b . Deep learning for automated size and shape analysis of nanoparticles in scanning electron microscopy. RSC advances, 13(5): 2795--2802

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Bengio, Y.; Louradour, J.; Collobert, R.; and Weston, J. 2009. Curriculum learning. In Proceedings of the 26th annual international conference on machine learning, 41--48

    2009

  8. [8]

    Bolya, D.; Zhou, C.; Xiao, F.; and Lee, Y. J. 2019. Yolact: Real-time instance segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, 9157--9166

    work page 2019

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    J.; Bravo-S \'a nchez, L.; Lozano, A.; Gupte, S

    Burgess, J.; Nirschl, J. J.; Bravo-S \'a nchez, L.; Lozano, A.; Gupte, S. R.; Galaz-Montoya, J. G.; Zhang, Y.; Su, Y.; Bhowmik, D.; Coman, Z.; et al. 2025. Microvqa: A multimodal reasoning benchmark for microscopy-based scientific research. In Proceedings of the Computer Visio...

    2025

  2. [10]

    I.; Khvedchenya, E.; Parinov, A.; Druzhinin, M.; and Kalinin, A

    Buslaev, A.; Iglovikov, V. I.; Khvedchenya, E.; Parinov, A.; Druzhinin, M.; and Kalinin, A. A. 2020. Albumentations: fast and flexible image augmentations. Information, 11(2): 125

    2020

  3. [11]

    Cai, Z.; and Vasconcelos, N. 2019. Cascade R-CNN: High quality object detection and instance segmentation. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 43(5): 1483--1498

    2019

  4. [12]

    D.; and Rethwisch, D

    Callister, W. D.; and Rethwisch, D. G. 2022. Fundamentals of materials science and engineering. John Wiley & Sons

    2022

  5. [13]

    Caron, M.; Touvron, H.; Misra, I.; J \'e gou, H.; Mairal, J.; Bojanowski, P.; and Joulin, A. 2021. Emerging properties in self-supervised vision transformers. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, 9650--9660

    2021

  6. [14]

    Chen, K.; Pang, J.; Wang, J.; Xiong, Y.; Li, X.; Sun, S.; Feng, W.; Liu, Z.; Shi, J.; Ouyang, W.; et al. 2019 a . Hybrid task cascade for instance segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 4974--4983

    2019

  7. [15]

    Chen, K.; Wang, J.; Pang, J.; Cao, Y.; Xiong, Y.; Li, X.; Sun, S.; Feng, W.; Liu, Z.; Xu, J.; et al. 2019 b . MMDetection: Open mmlab detection toolbox and benchmark. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.07155

    2019 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Chen, S.; Ding, C.; Liu, M.; Cheng, J.; and Tao, D. 2023. CPP-net: Context-aware polygon proposal network for nucleus segmentation. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 32: 980--994

    2023

  9. [17]

    G.; Kirillov, A.; and Girdhar, R

    Cheng, B.; Misra, I.; Schwing, A. G.; Kirillov, A.; and Girdhar, R. 2022. Masked-attention Mask Transformer for Universal Image Segmentation. CVPR

    2022

  10. [18]

    W.; Choudhary, A.; Agrawal, A.; Billinge, S

    Choudhary, K.; DeCost, B.; Chen, C.; Jain, A.; Tavazza, F.; Cohn, R.; Park, C. W.; Choudhary, A.; Agrawal, A.; Billinge, S. J.; et al. 2022. Recent advances and applications of deep learning methods in materials science. npj Computational Materials, 8(1): 59

    2022

  11. [19]

    Collins, T. J. 2007. ImageJ for microscopy. Biotechniques, 43(sup1): S25--S30

    2007

  12. [20]

    Comanici, G.; Bieber, E.; Schaekermann, M.; Pasupat, I.; Sachdeva, N.; Dhillon, I.; Blistein, M.; Ram, O.; Zhang, D.; Rosen, E.; et al. 2025. Gemini 2.5: Pushing the frontier with advanced reasoning, multimodality, long context, and next generation agentic capabilities. arXiv ...

    2025 arXiv

  13. [21]

    I.; Newbury, D

    Goldstein, J. I.; Newbury, D. E.; Michael, J. R.; Ritchie, N. W.; Scott, J. H. J.; and Joy, D. C. 2017. Scanning electron microscopy and X-ray microanalysis. springer

    2017

  14. [22]

    D.; Raza, S

    Graham, S.; Vu, Q. D.; Raza, S. E. A.; Azam, A.; Tsang, Y. W.; Kwak, J. T.; and Rajpoot, N. 2019. Hover-net: Simultaneous segmentation and classification of nuclei in multi-tissue histology images. Medical image analysis, 58: 101563

    2019

  15. [23]

    He, K.; Gkioxari, G.; Doll \'a r, P.; and Girshick, R. 2017. Mask r-cnn. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision, 2961--2969

    2017

  16. [24]

    Heusel, M.; Ramsauer, H.; Unterthiner, T.; Nessler, B.; and Hochreiter, S. 2017. Gans trained by a two time-scale update rule converge to a local nash equilibrium. Advances in neural information processing systems, 30

    2017

  17. [25]

    Ho, J.; Jain, A.; and Abbeel, P. 2020. Denoising diffusion probabilistic models. Advances in neural information processing systems, 33: 6840--6851

    2020

  18. [26]

    o rst, F.; Rempe, M.; Heine, L.; Seibold, C.; Keyl, J.; Baldini, G.; Ugurel, S.; Siveke, J.; Gr \

    H \"o rst, F.; Rempe, M.; Heine, L.; Seibold, C.; Keyl, J.; Baldini, G.; Ugurel, S.; Siveke, J.; Gr \"u nwald, B.; Egger, J.; et al. 2024. Cellvit: Vision transformers for precise cell segmentation and classification. Medical Image Analysis, 94: 103143

    2024

  19. [27]

    J.; Shen, Y.; Wallis, P.; Allen-Zhu, Z.; Li, Y.; Wang, S.; Wang, L.; Chen, W.; et al

    Hu, E. J.; Shen, Y.; Wallis, P.; Allen-Zhu, Z.; Li, Y.; Wang, S.; Wang, L.; Chen, W.; et al. 2022. Lora: Low-rank adaptation of large language models. ICLR, 1(2): 3

    2022

  20. [28]

    Jocher, G.; Qiu, J.; and Chaurasia, A. 2023. Ultralytics YOLO

    2023

  21. [29]

    Kirillov, A.; He, K.; Girshick, R.; Rother, C.; and Doll \'a r, P. 2019. Panoptic segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 9404--9413

    2019

  22. [30]

    C.; Lo, W.-Y.; et al

    Kirillov, A.; Mintun, E.; Ravi, N.; Mao, H.; Rolland, C.; Gustafson, L.; Xiao, T.; Whitehead, S.; Berg, A. C.; Lo, W.-Y.; et al. 2023. Segment anything. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, 4015--4026

    2023

  23. [31]

    H.; Ji, S.; Lee, B.; Yan, X.; et al

    Li, Z.; Yang, X.; Choi, K.; Zhu, W.; Hsieh, R.; Kim, H.; Lim, J. H.; Ji, S.; Lee, B.; Yan, X.; et al. 2024. Mmsci: A dataset for graduate-level multi-discipline multimodal scientific understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.04903

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    A.; Luo, Y.; Banerjee, S.; and Xu, B.-X

    Lin, B.; Emami, N.; Santos, D. A.; Luo, Y.; Banerjee, S.; and Xu, B.-X. 2022. A deep learned nanowire segmentation model using synthetic data augmentation. npj Computational Materials, 8(1): 88

    2022

  25. [33]

    D.; Abundez Barrera, I

    L \'o pez Guti \'e rrez, J. D.; Abundez Barrera, I. M.; and Torres G \'o mez, N. 2022. Nanoparticle detection on SEM images using a neural network and semi-synthetic training data. Nanomaterials, 12(11): 1818

    2022

  26. [34]

    R.; Zhang, Y.; Unell, A.; and Yeung, S

    Lozano, A.; Nirschl, J.; Burgess, J.; Gupte, S. R.; Zhang, Y.; Unell, A.; and Yeung, S. 2024. Micro-bench: A microscopy benchmark for vision-language understanding. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37: 30670--30685

    2024

  27. [35]

    Mill, L.; Wolff, D.; Gerrits, N.; Philipp, P.; Kling, L.; Vollnhals, F.; Ignatenko, A.; Jaremenko, C.; Huang, Y.; De Castro, O.; et al. 2021. Synthetic image rendering solves annotation problem in deep learning nanoparticle segmentation. Small Methods, 5(7): 2100223

    2021

  28. [36]

    Mokady, R.; Hertz, A.; Aberman, K.; Pritch, Y.; and Cohen-Or, D. 2023. Null-text inversion for editing real images using guided diffusion models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 6038--6047

    2023

  29. [37]

    G.; Mashukov, M

    Okunev, A. G.; Mashukov, M. Y.; Nartova, A. V.; and Matveev, A. V. 2020. Nanoparticle recognition on scanning probe microscopy images using computer vision and deep learning. Nanomaterials, 10(7): 1285

    2020

  30. [38]

    Pachitariu, M.; Rariden, M.; and Stringer, C. 2025. Cellpose-SAM: superhuman generalization for cellular segmentation. bioRxiv, 2025--04

    2025

  31. [39]

    Rombach, R.; Blattmann, A.; Lorenz, D.; Esser, P.; and Ommer, B. 2022. High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 10684--10695

    2022

  32. [40]

    Ruiz, N.; Li, Y.; Jampani, V.; Pritch, Y.; Rubinstein, M.; and Aberman, K. 2023. Dreambooth: Fine tuning text-to-image diffusion models for subject-driven generation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 22500--22510

    2023

  33. [41]

    C.; Torralba, A.; Murphy, K

    Russell, B. C.; Torralba, A.; Murphy, K. P.; and Freeman, W. T. 2008. LabelMe: a database and web-based tool for image annotation. International journal of computer vision, 77(1): 157--173

    2008

  34. [42]

    Schmidt, U.; Weigert, M.; Broaddus, C.; and Myers, G. 2018. Cell Detection with Star-Convex Polygons. In Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention - MICCAI 2018 - 21st International Conference, Granada, Spain, September 16-20, 2018, Proceedings, Part II , 265--273

    2018

  35. [43]

    D.; et al

    Shi, B.; Patel, M.; Yu, D.; Yan, J.; Li, Z.; Petriw, D.; Pruyn, T.; Smyth, K.; Passeport, E.; Miller, R. D.; et al. 2022. Automatic quantification and classification of microplastics in scanning electron micrographs via deep learning. Science of The Total Environment, 825: 153903

    2022

  36. [44]

    Stringer, C.; Wang, T.; Michaelos, M.; and Pachitariu, M. 2021. Cellpose: a generalist algorithm for cellular segmentation. Nature methods, 18(1): 100--106

    2021

  37. [45]

    Stuckner, J.; Harder, B.; and Smith, T. M. 2022. Microstructure segmentation with deep learning encoders pre-trained on a large microscopy dataset. npj Computational Materials, 8(1): 200

    2022

  38. [46]

    Vagenknecht, M.; Soukup, J.; Chen, A.; and Irizarry, R. 2023. A deep learning solution for particle size analysis in low resolution inline microscopy images based on generative adversarial network. Powder Technology, 426: 118641

    2023

  39. [47]

    Wang, X.; Zhang, R.; Kong, T.; Li, L.; and Shen, C. 2020. Solov2: Dynamic and fast instance segmentation. Advances in Neural information processing systems, 33: 17721--17732

    2020

  40. [48]

    Yildirim, B.; and Cole, J. M. 2021. Bayesian particle instance segmentation for electron microscopy image quantification. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 61(3): 1136--1149

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.