World Scientific
  • Search
    Quick Search in Journals
    Access type:
    Quick Search anywhere
    Access type:
    Advanced Search
  • My Cart
  •   
Skip main navigation

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More
×

System Upgrade on Tue, May 28th, 2024 at 2am (EDT)

Existing users will be able to log into the site and access content. However, E-commerce and registration of new users may not be available for up to 12 hours.
For online purchase, please visit us again. Contact us at [email protected] for any enquiries.
Research PaperOpen Access

Denoising of scanning electron microscope images for biological ultrastructure enhancement

    https://doi.org/10.1142/S021972002250007XCited by:3 (Source: Crossref)
    Previous
    Next

    Abstract

    Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) is of great significance for analyzing the ultrastructure. However, due to the requirements of data throughput and electron dose of biological samples in the imaging process, the SEM image of biological samples is often occupied by noise which severely affects the observation of ultrastructure. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze and establish a noise model of SEM and propose an effective denoising algorithm that can preserve the ultrastructure. We first investigated the noise source of SEM images and introduced a signal-related SEM noise model. Then, we validated the effectiveness of the noise model through experiments, which are designed with standard samples to reflect the relation between real signal intensity and noise. Based on the SEM noise model and traditional variance stabilization denoising strategy, we proposed a novel, two-stage denoising method. In the first stage variance stabilization, our VS-Net realizes the separation of signal-dependent noise and signal in the SEM image. In the second stage denoising, our D-Net employs the structure of U-Net and combines the attention mechanism to achieve efficient noise removal. Compared with other existing denoising methods for SEM images, our proposed method is more competitive in objective evaluation and visual effects. Source code is available on GitHub (https://github.com/VictorCSheng/VSID-Net).

    References

    • 1. Hildebrand DGC, Cicconet M, Torres RM et al., Whole-brain serial-section electron microscopy in larval zebrafish, Nature 545(7654) :345–349, 2017. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 2. Motta A, Berning M, Boergens KM et al., Dense connectomic reconstruction in layer 4 of the somatosensory cortex, Science 366(6469) :eaay3134, 2019. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 3. Yin W, Brittain D, Borseth J et al., A petascale automated imaging pipeline for mapping neuronal circuits with high-throughput transmission electron microscopy, Nat Commun 11(1) :1–12, 2020. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 4. Shapson-Coe A, Januszewski M, Berger DR et al., A connectomic study of a petascale fragment of human cerebral cortex, bioRxiv, bioRxiv 2021.05.29.446289, doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.05.29.446289, 2021. Google Scholar
    • 5. Li W, Deng H, Rao Q et al., An automated pipeline for mitochondrial segmentation on atum-sem stacks, J Bioinf Comput Biol 15(3) :1750015, 2017. Link, Google Scholar
    • 6. Liu J, Qi J, Chen X et al., Synaptic and mitochondrial plasticity associated with fear memory revealed by deep learning-based 3D reconstruction, bioRxiv, bioRxiv 2021.08.05.455246, doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.05.455246, 2021. Google Scholar
    • 7. Oho E, Ichise N, Martin WH et al., Practical method for noise removal in scanning electron microscopy, Scanning: J Scanning Microscopies 18(1) :50–54, 1996. Google Scholar
    • 8. Shepp LA, Vardi Y , Maximum likelihood reconstruction for emission tomography, IEEE Trans Med Imag 1(2) :113–122, 1982. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 9. Zhang Q, Bajaj CL , Cryo-electron microscopy data denoising based on the generalized digitized total variation method, Far East J Appl Math 45(2) :83, 2010. Medline, Google Scholar
    • 10. Willett RM, Harmany ZT, Marcia RF , Poisson image reconstruction with total variation regularization, 2010 IEEE Int Conf Image Processing, Hong Kong, China, pp. 4177–4180, 2010. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 11. Wang X, Feng X, Wang W et al., Iterative reweighted total generalized variation based Poisson noise removal model, Appl Math Comput 223 :264–277, 2013. Google Scholar
    • 12. Deledalle CA, Tupin F, Denis L , Poisson NL means: Unsupervised non local means for Poisson noise, 2010 IEEE Int Conf Image Processing, Hong Kong, China, pp. 801–804, 2010. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 13. Salmon J, Harmany Z, Deledalle CA et al., Poisson noise reduction with non-local PCA, J Math Imaging Vis 48(2) :279–294, 2014. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 14. Bindilatti AA, Mascarenhas NDA , A nonlocal poisson denoising algorithm based on stochastic distances, IEEE Signal Process Lett 20(11) :1010–1013, 2013. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 15. Yao H, Guan J, Liu T , Denoising protein–protein interaction network via variational graph auto-encoder for protein complex detection, J Bioinf Comput Biol 18(3) :2040010, 2020. Link, Google Scholar
    • 16. Zhang K, Zuo W, Chen Y et al., Beyond a gaussian denoiser: Residual learning of deep CNN for image denoising, IEEE Trans Image Process 26(7) :3142–3155, 2017. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 17. Guo S, Yan Z, Zhang K et al., Toward convolutional blind denoising of real photographs, Proc IEEE/CVF Conf Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Long Beach, California, pp. 1712–1722, 2019. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 18. Lefkimmiatis S , Universal denoising networks: A novel CNN architecture for image denoising, Proc IEEE Conf Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Salt Lake City, Utah, pp. 3204–3213, 2018. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 19. Zhang Y, Li K, Li K et al., Image super-resolution using very deep residual channel attention networks, Proc European Conf Computer Vision (ECCV), Munich, Germany, pp. 286–301, 2018. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 20. Bajić B, Suveer A, Gupta A et al., Denoising of short exposure transmission electron microscopy images for ultrastructural enhancement, 2018 IEEE 15th Int Symp Biomedical Imaging (ISBI 2018), Washington, D.C, pp. 921–925, 2018. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 21. Ede JM, Beanland R , Improving electron micrograph signal-to-noise with an atrous convolutional encoder-decoder, Ultramicroscopy 202 :18–25, 2019. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 22. Voit J, Lourie RW , The statistical mechanics of financial markets, Phys Today 55(8) :080000–080052, 2002. Google Scholar
    • 23. Foi A, Trimeche M, Katkovnik V et al., Practical Poissonian-Gaussian noise modeling and fitting for single-image raw-data, IEEE Trans Image Process 17(10) :1737–1754, 2008. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 24. Wilk MB, Gnanadesikan R , Probability plotting methods for the analysis for the analysis of data, Biometrika 55(1) :1–17, 1968. Medline, Google Scholar
    • 25. Anscombe FJ , The transformation of Poisson, binomial and negative-binomial data, Biometrika 35(3/4) :246–254, 1948. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 26. Makitalo M, Foi A , Optimal inversion of the generalized Anscombe transformation for Poisson-Gaussian noise, IEEE Trans Image Process 22(1) :91–103, 2012. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 27. Ioffe S, Szegedy C , Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift, Int Conf Machine Learning, Lille, France, pp. 448–456, 2015. Google Scholar
    • 28. Nair V, Hinton GE , Rectified linear units improve restricted Boltzmann machines, Int Conf Machine Learning, Haifa, Israel, pp. 807–814, 2010. Google Scholar
    • 29. Ronneberger O, Fischer P, Brox T , U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation, Int Conf Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention (Springer, Cham), pp. 234–241, 2015. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 30. Zhang B, Fadili JM, Starck JL , Wavelets, ridgelets, and curvelets for Poisson noise removal, IEEE Trans Image Process 17(7) :1093–1108, 2008. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 31. He K, Zhang X, Ren S et al., Delving deep into rectifiers: Surpassing human-level performance on imagenet classification, Proc IEEE Int Conf Computer Vision, Santiago, Chile, pp. 1026–1034, 2015. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 32. Kingma DP, Ba J, Adam: A method for stochastic optimization, 2014, arXiv:1412.6980. Google Scholar
    • 33. Dabov K, Foi A, Katkovnik V et al., Image denoising by sparse 3D transform-domain collaborative filtering, IEEE Trans Image Process 16(8) :2080–2095, 2007. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
    • 34. Krull A, Buchholz TO, Jug F , Noise2void-learning denoising from single noisy images, Proc IEEE/CVF Conf Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Long Beach, California, pp. 2129–2137, 2019. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • 35. He K, Zhang X, Ren S et al., Deep residual learning for image recognition, Proc IEEE Conf Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las Vegas, Nevada, pp. 770–778, 2016. Crossref, Google Scholar