Paper detail

Information: to Harvest, to Have and to Hold

Signal-to-Noise Ratios (SNRs) and the Shannon-Hartley channel capacity are metrics that help define the loss of known information while transferring data through a noisy channel. These metrics cannot be used for quantifying the opposite process: the harvesting of new information. Correlation functions and correlation coefficients do play an important role in collecting new information from noisy sources. However, Bershad and Rockmore [1974] based their formulas on contradictory a priori assumptions in Real-space and in Fourier-space. Their formulations were subsequently copied literally to the practical science of electron microscopy, where those a priori assumptions now distort most quality metrics in Cryo-EM. Cryo-EM became a great success in recent years [Wiley Award 2017; Nobel prize for Chemistry 2017] and became the method of choice for revealing structures of biological complexes like ribosomes, viruses, or corona-virus spikes, vitally important during the current COVID-19 pandemic. Those early misconceptions now interfere with the objective comparison of independently obtained results. We found that the roots of these problems significantly pre-date those 1970s publications and were already inherent in the original SNR definitions. We here propose novel metrics to assess the amount of information harvested in an experiment, information which is measured in bits. These new metrics assess the total amount of information collected on an object, as well as the information density distribution within that object. The new metrics can be applied everywhere where data is collected, processed, compressed, or compared. As an example, we compare the structures of two recently published SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins. We also introduce new metrics for transducer-quality assessment in many sciences including: cryo-EM, biomedical imaging, microscopy, signal processing, photography, tomography, etc.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.