More Like this

1. ACTIVA : realistic single-cell RNA-seq generation with automatic cell-type identification using introspective variational autoencoders

   https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btac095  

   Heydari, A. Ali ; Davalos, Oscar A. ; Zhao, Lihong ; Hoyer, Katrina K. ; Sindi, Suzanne S. ; Mathelier, ed., Anthony ( February 2022 , Bioinformatics)

   Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNAseq) technologies allow for measurements of gene expression at a single-cell resolution. This provides researchers with a tremendous advantage for detecting heterogeneity, delineating cellular maps or identifying rare subpopulations. However, a critical complication remains: the low number of single-cell observations due to limitations by rarity of subpopulation, tissue degradation or cost. This absence of sufficient data may cause inaccuracy or irreproducibility of downstream analysis. In this work, we present Automated Cell-Type-informed Introspective Variational Autoencoder (ACTIVA): a novel framework for generating realistic synthetic data using a single-stream adversarial variational autoencoder conditioned with cell-type information. Within a single framework, ACTIVA can enlarge existing datasets and generate specific subpopulations on demand, as opposed to two separate models [such as single-cell GAN (scGAN) and conditional scGAN (cscGAN)]. Data generation and augmentation with ACTIVA can enhance scRNAseq pipelines and analysis, such as benchmarking new algorithms, studying the accuracy of classifiers and detecting marker genes. ACTIVA will facilitate analysis of smaller datasets, potentially reducing the number of patients and animals necessary in initial studies.

   We train and evaluate models on multiple public scRNAseq datasets. In comparison to GAN-based models (scGAN and cscGAN), we demonstrate that ACTIVA generates cells that are more realistic and harder for classifiers to identify as synthetic which also have better pair-wise correlation between genes. Data augmentation with ACTIVA significantly improves classification of rare subtypes (more than 45% improvement compared with not augmenting and 4% better than cscGAN) all while reducing run-time by an order of magnitude in comparison to both models.

   The codes and datasets are hosted on Zenodo (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5879639). Tutorials are available at https://github.com/SindiLab/ACTIVA.

   Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

    

   more » « less
2. CellMeSH: probabilistic cell-type identification using indexed literature

   https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btab834  

   Mao, Shunfu ; Zhang, Yue ; Seelig, Georg ; Kannan, Sreeram ( February 2022 , Bioinformatics)

   Birol, Inanc (Ed.)

   Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) is widely used for analyzing gene expression in multi-cellular systems and provides unprecedented access to cellular heterogeneity. scRNA-seq experiments aim to identify and quantify all cell types present in a sample. Measured single-cell transcriptomes are grouped by similarity and the resulting clusters are mapped to cell types based on cluster-specific gene expression patterns. While the process of generating clusters has become largely automated, annotation remains a laborious ad hoc effort that requires expert biological knowledge.

   Here, we introduce CellMeSH—a new automated approach to identifying cell types for clusters based on prior literature. CellMeSH combines a database of gene–cell-type associations with a probabilistic method for database querying. The database is constructed by automatically linking gene and cell-type information from millions of publications using existing indexed literature resources. Compared to manually constructed databases, CellMeSH is more comprehensive and is easily updated with new data. The probabilistic query method enables reliable information retrieval even though the gene–cell-type associations extracted from the literature are noisy. CellMeSH is also able to optionally utilize prior knowledge about tissues or cells for further annotation improvement. CellMeSH achieves top-one and top-three accuracies on a number of mouse and human datasets that are consistently better than existing approaches.

   Web server at https://uncurl.cs.washington.edu/db_query and API at https://github.com/shunfumao/cellmesh.

   Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

    

   more » « less
3. scPNMF: sparse gene encoding of single cells to facilitate gene selection for targeted gene profiling

   https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btab273  

   Song, Dongyuan ; Li, Kexin ; Hemminger, Zachary ; Wollman, Roy ; Li, Jingyi Jessica ( July 2021 , Bioinformatics)

   ABSTRACT: Motivation Single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) captures whole transcriptome information of individual cells. While scRNA-seq measures thousands of genes, researchers are often interested in only dozens to hundreds of genes for a closer study. Then, a question is how to select those informative genes from scRNA-seq data. Moreover, single-cell targeted gene profiling technologies are gaining popularity for their low costs, high sensitivity and extra (e.g. spatial) information; however, they typically can only measure up to a few hundred genes. Then another challenging question is how to select genes for targeted gene profiling based on existing scRNA-seq data. Results Here, we develop the single-cell Projective Non-negative Matrix Factorization (scPNMF) method to select informative genes from scRNA-seq data in an unsupervised way. Compared with existing gene selection methods, scPNMF has two advantages. First, its selected informative genes can better distinguish cell types. Second, it enables the alignment of new targeted gene profiling data with reference data in a low-dimensional space to facilitate the prediction of cell types in the new data. Technically, scPNMF modifies the PNMF algorithm for gene selection by changing the initialization and adding a basis selection step, which selects informative bases to distinguish cell types. We demonstrate that scPNMF outperforms the state-of-the-art gene selection methods on diverse scRNA-seq datasets. Moreover, we show that scPNMF can guide the design of targeted gene profiling experiments and the cell-type annotation on targeted gene profiling data. Availability and implementation The R package is open-access and available at https://github.com/JSB-UCLA/scPNMF. The data used in this work are available at Zenodo: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4797997. Supplementary information Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online. 

   more » « less
4. A Deep Learning-Based Real-time Seizure Detection System

   https://doi.org/10.1109/SPMB50085.2020.9353623  

   Shawki, N. ; Elseify, T. ; Cap, T. ; Shah, V. ; Obeid, I. ; Picone, J. ( December 2020 , Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB))

   Obeid, Iyad Selesnick (Ed.)

   Electroencephalography (EEG) is a popular clinical monitoring tool used for diagnosing brain-related disorders such as epilepsy [1]. As monitoring EEGs in a critical-care setting is an expensive and tedious task, there is a great interest in developing real-time EEG monitoring tools to improve patient care quality and efficiency [2]. However, clinicians require automatic seizure detection tools that provide decisions with at least 75% sensitivity and less than 1 false alarm (FA) per 24 hours [3]. Some commercial tools recently claim to reach such performance levels, including the Olympic Brainz Monitor [4] and Persyst 14 [5]. In this abstract, we describe our efforts to transform a high-performance offline seizure detection system [3] into a low latency real-time or online seizure detection system. An overview of the system is shown in Figure 1. The main difference between an online versus offline system is that an online system should always be causal and has minimum latency which is often defined by domain experts. The offline system, shown in Figure 2, uses two phases of deep learning models with postprocessing [3]. The channel-based long short term memory (LSTM) model (Phase 1 or P1) processes linear frequency cepstral coefficients (LFCC) [6] features from each EEG channel separately. We use the hypotheses generated by the P1 model and create additional features that carry information about the detected events and their confidence. The P2 model uses these additional features and the LFCC features to learn the temporal and spatial aspects of the EEG signals using a hybrid convolutional neural network (CNN) and LSTM model. Finally, Phase 3 aggregates the results from both P1 and P2 before applying a final postprocessing step. The online system implements Phase 1 by taking advantage of the Linux piping mechanism, multithreading techniques, and multi-core processors. To convert Phase 1 into an online system, we divide the system into five major modules: signal preprocessor, feature extractor, event decoder, postprocessor, and visualizer. The system reads 0.1-second frames from each EEG channel and sends them to the feature extractor and the visualizer. The feature extractor generates LFCC features in real time from the streaming EEG signal. Next, the system computes seizure and background probabilities using a channel-based LSTM model and applies a postprocessor to aggregate the detected events across channels. The system then displays the EEG signal and the decisions simultaneously using a visualization module. The online system uses C++, Python, TensorFlow, and PyQtGraph in its implementation. The online system accepts streamed EEG data sampled at 250 Hz as input. The system begins processing the EEG signal by applying a TCP montage [8]. Depending on the type of the montage, the EEG signal can have either 22 or 20 channels. To enable the online operation, we send 0.1-second (25 samples) length frames from each channel of the streamed EEG signal to the feature extractor and the visualizer. Feature extraction is performed sequentially on each channel. The signal preprocessor writes the sample frames into two streams to facilitate these modules. In the first stream, the feature extractor receives the signals using stdin. In parallel, as a second stream, the visualizer shares a user-defined file with the signal preprocessor. This user-defined file holds raw signal information as a buffer for the visualizer. The signal preprocessor writes into the file while the visualizer reads from it. Reading and writing into the same file poses a challenge. The visualizer can start reading while the signal preprocessor is writing into it. To resolve this issue, we utilize a file locking mechanism in the signal preprocessor and visualizer. Each of the processes temporarily locks the file, performs its operation, releases the lock, and tries to obtain the lock after a waiting period. The file locking mechanism ensures that only one process can access the file by prohibiting other processes from reading or writing while one process is modifying the file [9]. The feature extractor uses circular buffers to save 0.3 seconds or 75 samples from each channel for extracting 0.2-second or 50-sample long center-aligned windows. The module generates 8 absolute LFCC features where the zeroth cepstral coefficient is replaced by a temporal domain energy term. For extracting the rest of the features, three pipelines are used. The differential energy feature is calculated in a 0.9-second absolute feature window with a frame size of 0.1 seconds. The difference between the maximum and minimum temporal energy terms is calculated in this range. Then, the first derivative or the delta features are calculated using another 0.9-second window. Finally, the second derivative or delta-delta features are calculated using a 0.3-second window [6]. The differential energy for the delta-delta features is not included. In total, we extract 26 features from the raw sample windows which add 1.1 seconds of delay to the system. We used the Temple University Hospital Seizure Database (TUSZ) v1.2.1 for developing the online system [10]. The statistics for this dataset are shown in Table 1. A channel-based LSTM model was trained using the features derived from the train set using the online feature extractor module. A window-based normalization technique was applied to those features. In the offline model, we scale features by normalizing using the maximum absolute value of a channel [11] before applying a sliding window approach. Since the online system has access to a limited amount of data, we normalize based on the observed window. The model uses the feature vectors with a frame size of 1 second and a window size of 7 seconds. We evaluated the model using the offline P1 postprocessor to determine the efficacy of the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique. As shown by the results of experiments 1 and 4 in Table 2, these changes give us a comparable performance to the offline model. The online event decoder module utilizes this trained model for computing probabilities for the seizure and background classes. These posteriors are then postprocessed to remove spurious detections. The online postprocessor receives and saves 8 seconds of class posteriors in a buffer for further processing. It applies multiple heuristic filters (e.g., probability threshold) to make an overall decision by combining events across the channels. These filters evaluate the average confidence, the duration of a seizure, and the channels where the seizures were observed. The postprocessor delivers the label and confidence to the visualizer. The visualizer starts to display the signal as soon as it gets access to the signal file, as shown in Figure 1 using the “Signal File” and “Visualizer” blocks. Once the visualizer receives the label and confidence for the latest epoch from the postprocessor, it overlays the decision and color codes that epoch. The visualizer uses red for seizure with the label SEIZ and green for the background class with the label BCKG. Once the streaming finishes, the system saves three files: a signal file in which the sample frames are saved in the order they were streamed, a time segmented event (TSE) file with the overall decisions and confidences, and a hypotheses (HYP) file that saves the label and confidence for each epoch. The user can plot the signal and decisions using the signal and HYP files with only the visualizer by enabling appropriate options. For comparing the performance of different stages of development, we used the test set of TUSZ v1.2.1 database. It contains 1015 EEG records of varying duration. The any-overlap performance [12] of the overall system shown in Figure 2 is 40.29% sensitivity with 5.77 FAs per 24 hours. For comparison, the previous state-of-the-art model developed on this database performed at 30.71% sensitivity with 6.77 FAs per 24 hours [3]. The individual performances of the deep learning phases are as follows: Phase 1’s (P1) performance is 39.46% sensitivity and 11.62 FAs per 24 hours, and Phase 2 detects seizures with 41.16% sensitivity and 11.69 FAs per 24 hours. We trained an LSTM model with the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique for developing the online system. Using the offline decoder and postprocessor, the model performed at 36.23% sensitivity with 9.52 FAs per 24 hours. The trained model was then evaluated with the online modules. The current performance of the overall online system is 45.80% sensitivity with 28.14 FAs per 24 hours. Table 2 summarizes the performances of these systems. The performance of the online system deviates from the offline P1 model because the online postprocessor fails to combine the events as the seizure probability fluctuates during an event. The modules in the online system add a total of 11.1 seconds of delay for processing each second of the data, as shown in Figure 3. In practice, we also count the time for loading the model and starting the visualizer block. When we consider these facts, the system consumes 15 seconds to display the first hypothesis. The system detects seizure onsets with an average latency of 15 seconds. Implementing an automatic seizure detection model in real time is not trivial. We used a variety of techniques such as the file locking mechanism, multithreading, circular buffers, real-time event decoding, and signal-decision plotting to realize the system. A video demonstrating the system is available at: https://www.isip.piconepress.com/projects/nsf_pfi_tt/resources/videos/realtime_eeg_analysis/v2.5.1/video_2.5.1.mp4. The final conference submission will include a more detailed analysis of the online performance of each module. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Research reported in this publication was most recently supported by the National Science Foundation Partnership for Innovation award number IIP-1827565 and the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Universal Research Enhancement Program (PA CURE). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official views of any of these organizations. REFERENCES [1] A. Craik, Y. He, and J. L. Contreras-Vidal, “Deep learning for electroencephalogram (EEG) classification tasks: a review,” J. Neural Eng., vol. 16, no. 3, p. 031001, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/ab0ab5. [2] A. C. Bridi, T. Q. Louro, and R. C. L. Da Silva, “Clinical Alarms in intensive care: implications of alarm fatigue for the safety of patients,” Rev. Lat. Am. Enfermagem, vol. 22, no. 6, p. 1034, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-1169.3488.2513. [3] M. Golmohammadi, V. Shah, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Deep Learning Approaches for Automatic Seizure Detection from Scalp Electroencephalograms,” in Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology: Emerging Trends in Research and Applications, 1st ed., I. Obeid, I. Selesnick, and J. Picone, Eds. New York, New York, USA: Springer, 2020, pp. 233–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36844-9_8. [4] “CFM Olympic Brainz Monitor.” [Online]. Available: https://newborncare.natus.com/products-services/newborn-care-products/newborn-brain-injury/cfm-olympic-brainz-monitor. [Accessed: 17-Jul-2020]. [5] M. L. Scheuer, S. B. Wilson, A. Antony, G. Ghearing, A. Urban, and A. I. Bagic, “Seizure Detection: Interreader Agreement and Detection Algorithm Assessments Using a Large Dataset,” J. Clin. Neurophysiol., 2020. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNP.0000000000000709. [6] A. Harati, M. Golmohammadi, S. Lopez, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved EEG Event Classification Using Differential Energy,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium, 2015, pp. 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/SPMB.2015.7405421. [7] V. Shah, C. Campbell, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved Spatio-Temporal Modeling in Automated Seizure Detection using Channel-Dependent Posteriors,” Neurocomputing, 2021. [8] W. Tatum, A. Husain, S. Benbadis, and P. Kaplan, Handbook of EEG Interpretation. New York City, New York, USA: Demos Medical Publishing, 2007. [9] D. P. Bovet and C. Marco, Understanding the Linux Kernel, 3rd ed. O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2005. https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/understanding-the-linux/0596005652/. [10] V. Shah et al., “The Temple University Hospital Seizure Detection Corpus,” Front. Neuroinform., vol. 12, pp. 1–6, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2018.00083. [11] F. Pedregosa et al., “Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 12, pp. 2825–2830, 2011. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1953048.2078195. [12] J. Gotman, D. Flanagan, J. Zhang, and B. Rosenblatt, “Automatic seizure detection in the newborn: Methods and initial evaluation,” Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol., vol. 103, no. 3, pp. 356–362, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-4694(97)00003-9. 

   more » « less
5. Improving Crowdsourcing-Based Image Classification Through Expanded Input Elicitation and Machine Learning

   https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2022.848056  

   Yasmin, Romena ; Hassan, Md Mahmudulla ; Grassel, Joshua T. ; Bhogaraju, Harika ; Escobedo, Adolfo R. ; Fuentes, Olac ( June 2022 , Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence)

   This work investigates how different forms of input elicitation obtained from crowdsourcing can be utilized to improve the quality of inferred labels for image classification tasks, where an image must be labeled as either positive or negative depending on the presence/absence of a specified object. Five types of input elicitation methods are tested: binary classification (positive or negative); the ( x, y )-coordinate of the position participants believe a target object is located; level of confidence in binary response (on a scale from 0 to 100%); what participants believe the majority of the other participants' binary classification is; and participant's perceived difficulty level of the task (on a discrete scale). We design two crowdsourcing studies to test the performance of a variety of input elicitation methods and utilize data from over 300 participants. Various existing voting and machine learning (ML) methods are applied to make the best use of these inputs. In an effort to assess their performance on classification tasks of varying difficulty, a systematic synthetic image generation process is developed. Each generated image combines items from the MPEG-7 Core Experiment CE-Shape-1 Test Set into a single image using multiple parameters (e.g., density, transparency, etc.) and may or may not contain a target object. The difficulty of these images is validated by the performance of an automated image classification method. Experiment results suggest that more accurate results can be achieved with smaller training datasets when both the crowdsourced binary classification labels and the average of the self-reported confidence values in these labels are used as features for the ML classifiers. Moreover, when a relatively larger properly annotated dataset is available, in some cases augmenting these ML algorithms with the results (i.e., probability of outcome) from an automated classifier can achieve even higher performance than what can be obtained by using any one of the individual classifiers. Lastly, supplementary analysis of the collected data demonstrates that other performance metrics of interest, namely reduced false-negative rates, can be prioritized through special modifications of the proposed aggregation methods. 

   more » « less