henhao
Sign in
BioinformaticsbioRxiv
Preprint

A human-in-the-loop approach for faster cell tracking

Mihaela MihaylovaiD, Ankur AnkaniD, Shabaz SultaniD, Inge M. N. WorteliD, Jérémy PostatiD, Maryl HarrisiD, Mauricio MerinoiD, Judith N. MandliD, Johannes C. TextoriD

PDFDOI

Abstract

Traditional cell tracking methods focus on fully automated tracking. The quality of the generated tracks, however, is heavily influenced by factors such as cell speed and density. In complex scenarios where track correctness is essential, an efficient and reliable tool for manual track correction remains a key component of the cell tracking process. Most tracking tools that allow for such manual correction do so only as a post-processing step, using human feedback to correct one track error at a time -- without improving the quality of other tracks in the dataset. This highlights the need for a more efficient track correction method that iteratively integrates human feedback into the automated tracking process. In this paper we propose a human-in-the-loop approach to cell tracking and investigate the extent to which a tracking algorithm can learn from human input during the tracking process. We combine a graph representation of cell detections, Dijkstra's shortest path algorithm, and a neural network that predicts cell displacement to generate initial track suggestions. We introduce a tool that enables human feedback on individual tracks suggested by the algorithm; this feedback is then propagated to improve subsequent track generation. Compared to the traditional approach of fully automated tracking with correction as a post-processing step, our human-in-the-loop tracking framework reduces the number of corrections required. Finally, we show how this approach can be integrated with existing state-of-the-art tracking algorithms by using pre-generated tracks as a prior, improving the quality of tracks suggested to the human annotator.

02 /Specification & Classification

Click any tag to browse matching papers

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.

Similarity Map
SelectedSame fieldCross-field
THISLöffler '21Betjes '25Sugawara '26Kok '20Fazeli '20Ni '25
72% semantic matchBioinformatics
Katharina Löffler, Tim Scherr, Ralf Mikut·PLoS ONE·Sep 7, 2021· 37 citations