Source author record

David E. Timm

David E. Timm appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

1works
2topics
2close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

1 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Attention-guided Quality Assessment for Automated Cryo-EM Grid Screening

Cryogenic electron microscopy (cryo-EM) has become an enabling technology in drug discovery and in understanding molecular bases of disease by producing near-atomic resolution (less than 0.4 nm) 3D reconstructions of biological macromolecules. The imaging process required for 3D reconstructions involves a highly iterative and empirical screening process, starting with the acquisition of low magnification images of the cryo-EM grids. These images are inspected for squares that are likely to contain useful molecular signals. Potentially useful squares within the grid are then imaged at progressively higher magnifications, with the goal of identifying sub-micron areas within circular holes (bounded by the squares) for imaging at high magnification. This arduous, multi-step data acquisition process represents a bottleneck for obtaining a high throughput data collection. Here, we focus on automating the early decision making for the microscope operator, scoring low magnification images of squares, and proposing the first deep learning framework, XCryoNet, for automated cryo-EM grid screening. XCryoNet is a semi-supervised, attention-guided deep learning approach that provides explainable scoring of automatically extracted square images using limited amounts of labeled data. Results show up to 8% and 37% improvements over a fully supervised and a no-attention solution, respectively, when labeled data is scarce.