Here is a fun one I would LOVE feedback on, because its confusing the crap out of me if I should checkmark 'Abnormal sample' or not before I submit it.


http://puu.sh/nBzMy/25bba5ddad.jpg

http://puu.sh/nBAGg/5e1f54ab69.jpg blue + green
http://puu.sh/nBANk/f5a4f5bac8.jpg green only
http://puu.sh/nBAKB/c67b6f994b.jpg red + blue

I kinda took a bunch of screenshots of it for my oddity folder. :)

Im pretty sure you selected the correct one... its just gonna take time for people to get good at this, and for the system to weed out the bad ones =p



was i was right in selecting the two categories for this one? Previously i was only selecting Nucleus on samples like this because i felt it was the prominent feature, but now as ive went though some of these and getting more comfortable, im thinking this should be both Nucleus and Cytoplasm?
http://i.imgur.com/iYVeStn.png

I went with Cytoplasm and not Vesicles because the staining in the red part was more blurry, not really defined dots


Im also curious what the difference between an "Abnormal sample" and "cell to cell variation"/"not identifiable" would be

If you look at all the cytoplasm examples the nuclei are pretty much void of green. In your situation the nucleus is filled with green so I wouldn't categorize this as cytoplasm. But I might as well be wrong.

http://i.imgur.com/tkkrx53.png Try and work that one out for a laugh.

The new feature has caused many inconsistent results. Especialy with basic findings where you are 100% accurate but get a failed result. This has baffled me if I should continue wasting my time in project failure.

For starters the pictures should be increased in size instead of looking through a key hole.

Can we get 3d images if possible.

Why did I fail with one of the results. Please give back users more explanatory information to educate them more on failed results instead of guessing.


I like to help like many others though I believe the new feature needs to be expanded with more features. At this stage until I see improvement I won't be committed to it as I once thought.

I am an Advanced Analyst now.

I'm doing Science.

Hey thanks for the reply, Just to tell you something about 3D it would be awesome. Let me explain my views on 2D and 3D. Now for e.g. we have all these green dots supposedly only in the blue area. Ok with 2D you assume there all inside when you look at the photo. But with 3D it can uncover more detail for e.g. at times 3D shots can tell you if all those green dots are floating above the blue area or if they are literally sitting in the blue area. This could be one major factor eliminating errors and being more accurate right ?

Even though it takes 1 minute wouldn't it be more important to be more accurate ?, I would importantly like to be more accurate rather than not especially with this application. I dont want to sound like a smart ass but accuracy is prime. Maybe your software does it already but reports back in 2D i'm not sure maybe. Or is there other applications that can speed up the time for processing images quicker ?. I think over the long run you would have more accurate results if 3D is the latest technology we use today. E.g. the new 3D laser printers.

Anyways thats just my own thoughts.

I really enjoyed reading your reply. Didn't realize how many different cameras there are and how much light can or can't get through. I understand about the slice, i guess that is very accurate in some way. Well speaking on behalf of me and probably many others i think it's going to take some time to get use to. I don't come from a scientist background. Worked in I.T. for some years and was just looking at it from an application point of view.

I spent many years in software automation. Would be nice to have recognition filters so instead of you selecting what images come close to the examined photo you could possibly setup filter options for it instead. E.g. if you see more than 5 green dots in the blue area have that selected instead of you selecting it on the right hand side of the pane. I guess since the photos are static we can't setup such filters cause a photo is a photo.

Because you work with colors is there a way we can calculate how much red/ green, blue light is in the photo. Why am i asking this ?. Again having filters setup based on light ratios based on %. So if there 60% green light in the photo which is it likely to be or be as close the 3 category on the right side of the pane.

Again why am i talking about colors, there are so many results not sure for e.g. 5 or less green dots in blue area have same green light frequency light as the others that full in the same basket. Or is most of this color thing I am talking about irrelevant.

Just my thoughts.

Once again thanks for sharing

A quick question on the cell-to-cell variation option, how much does it play into the weighting of your accuracy change if you tick cell-to-cell variation but others haven't, or if you don't tick it and others have? Is it treated just like the other answers?

The reason I am asking is that a lot of the time, this box doesn't seem to be being ticked by the majority for some obvious variation so the consensus has it at 0. I guess this is also even more subjective than the other classifications as it comes down to how much variation justifies ticking the option.

I think the classification of this image is wrong. It is not Nucleus. It should be Mitochondria.

Sample #100054449

Blue - Green - G+B

I feel like a rebel... or a pioneer.
Cytoplasm (80%), sure... but can everyone miss small spots "overlapping with holes in the blue marker"?

I had trouble tagging with "nucleus" (80%) because staining intensity seems at the same level both in and outside the nucleus.
I regret not tagging "nuclear membrane" - its kind of faint, didn't notice until now.

In this classification result, I realized I was wrong about Cytoplasm for so many cases.

I need to get an image hosting thing, I've had some really interesting ones. One looked like a nucleus popped and all the goo came out! It was glowing bright green and there was a black spot where the nucleus should have been.

https://i.gyazo.com/54efcad7e2f4666f6ad66988a2e17ceb.png

I'm a bit confused about this one. I might be totally wrong but when I read the description of cytoplasm it says:

Seen throughout all the whole cell, except in the nucleus (blue marker). The intensity can vary throughout the cell, and is often stronger close to the nucleus.

in other words: all the red might be green but the blue is blue without a spec of green in it.

Now I got image 100096917 (as in the screenshot here: http://i.imgur.com/cVv5kwc.png ). Basically its green all over so I figured the sample was useless. But to my surprise 50% match was on cytoplasm. Am I misunderstanding cytoplasm and reject my samples to soon. Or did 50% of the people not read the first line of the description?

EDIT: same on 100021233: http://i.imgur.com/wRnL8Sq.png that one is even fully conflicting with both Nucleus and Cytoplasm

I have a case that fit both Nucleoplasm and Nucleoli, but these two options are exclusive in the mini game.
Green and blue channel: http://uploadpie.com/LiGB6
Green channel: http://uploadpie.com/eEVpE
Blue channel: http://uploadpie.com/XqAqA

They don't really look like Centrosome because they are not two very well defined spots side by side. I would just have gone MTOC for this.

I've heard that some images was analyzed by professionals?
screenshot

I had that one just now; the splash of green overlaps the nucleus on every cell, so it can't really be anything outside the nucleus. I put Nuclear Membrane, Abnormal sample.

A Google images for "abnormal nuclear membrane stain" shows a couple examples where the membrane could fold in on itself or maybe shrink, to look slightly like that.

http://i.imgur.com/DGmPo87.png

I get these sometimes, but usually there's no dye anywhere except for a single bundle of microtubule ends somewhere. This one has green goo all over the place.

Ok so, this game is totally wrong.

look at this sample:

http://www.netsky.org/eve/notcor2.png


As you can see it's wrong, but it's not.
I chose Nucleoplasm because it is Nucleoplasm, but game says no it is not.



And the "correct answer" was: Nuclear speckles

That's a great example of endoplasmic reticulum. See how it looks like a really thick spider web?

http://i.imgur.com/ztbGdXM.png

Not really sure I agree with cytoplasm on this one.

Here's another one! http://i.imgur.com/MG3jQBa.jpg

There's one of those in the upper right corner. I had another one earlier with two of those side-by-side and what looked like centrosomes on each one. What are they?

Another one. They're everywhere! http://i.imgur.com/bOcz5zF.jpg

oh my god http://i.imgur.com/uAEFu67.jpg

Why are there so many of these all of a sudden? I don't think the earlier slides had so many.

Guys, vesicles!

http://i.imgur.com/gZ7mtke.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/4y7CBQd.png

I think we need another thread for problem slides, since these aren't really interesting or challenging.

I got the exact same image and totally agree with your classification. I did the same.

I wonder how much screwed the baseline is due to the community consensus approach. Is there anything known on how they avoid those effects?

Cheers
Rakin

Here's an interesting one I came across. It looks as though the stain might be binding cilia:

http://imgur.com/1naVxSY

Project Discovery,

Please confirm that I was wrong on this classification. I put cytoskeleton (cytokinetic bridge) because to the top right of the bottom-most cell I clearly see one. Let me know if my eyes are playing tricks.

http://uploadpie.com/HmEUW


Thanks

Why is the nucleus option wrong in this accuracy sample?
http://imgur.com/SjyQSxW

Please explain.

Image no. 100000325

Classification Result says: "Nuclear Speckles"; it sure looks like "Nucleoplasm" to me.

What's the deal here? Is this faint variation enough to declassify it as "nucleoplasm" and flag it as "nuclear speckles"?

If so, some explaining text would be appreciated with those very hard to understand "teaching moments".

Thank you! :)

I just got a really weird sample.... at first glance it looks obvious but then it doesn't really fit into any category 100%

http://imgur.com/Wi6KjrS


more detail
http://imgur.com/BMsSyd1

I had an image analysed by a professional today:
http://imgur.com/8cy3D7m
How much difference in intensity is needed to be correct with Cell-to-Cell-Variations? Or was the professional wrong?

Sample 100000440 has been defined as 100% Vesicles, and I regret not making this choice, in addition to Rods and Rings. I picked R&R because I saw a few rod-like structures... am I completely wrong, or could this sample contain both R&R and Vesicles? Must complete ring structures be present, in samples with R&R? I've marked the BG views with arrows.

Area 1 BG -- RGB || Area 2 BG -- RGB


Sample 100000264 has been defined as 100% Cytoplasm, but I wonder what the structures that seem to outline some parts of the cells might be, marked with arrows in my Green-only screenshot. I thought they might represent a plasma membrane.

100000264 Green -- 100000264 RGB

http://i.imgur.com/1jGFchx.jpg

Im by far noone that claims professionals are wrong, and i understand a lot of me seeing not the right things in PD, but im very, very sure that nucleoli shouldnt be wrong here.

Thanks for the explanation.

But for me it raises a problem: How can I decide if the visible varaitions in the staining are a result of the technical imaging-process or the staining itself?

I think there's an error on the classification for your control sample.

http://i.imgur.com/pWNR1bC.png

Thanks for your time.

I have no idea how some people are selecting a few of their answers in PD. It's annoying because I'll select features that are very clearly present, but no one else selected that feature type and I then get dinged a few pecent. I'm like WTH?

I still like the idea of PD but it's annoying my ratings are affected because others aren't thorough.

Could we take a look at this control sample as well please.

http://imgur.com/vqg6EmT

I believe both should be the correct answer.

http://imgur.com/bLeQJPR

Cell division in metaphase/anaphase with the centrosomes lighting up. Thought this was a kind of cool find!

Would also like to take a moment to ask about the considerations you take when looking at nuclear staining, and this image happens to also contain what I've been thinking about for a while. In this image, you can clearly see that there's a difference in attenuation where the nucleoli are. It's very clear cut, and the attenuation difference matches the "holes" in the blue filter nucleus perfectly. The cytoplasm is however lighting up fairly well in this image too, and because of this, the nucleoli would appear to stain as well, since you have cytoplasm surrounding the nucleus. For this sample a lot of people went for nucleus. Nobody went for nucleoplasm. I'm thinking it's because the aforementioned "depth issues" causes confusion. Or am I getting this wrong?

Here's an image of the green filter:

http://imgur.com/JnfSGYL

While feeling pretty confident about the nucleoplasm staining, I was also thinking maybe there's no nuclear staining at all, like, maybe the difference in attenuation is due to the membrane lighting up? Or if I spot these nucleoli having a different attenuation compared to the surroundings, can I always be sure that the nucleoplasm is stained?

Sorry for the wall of text. Appreciate any input.

It seems that control sample 100455950 has been mislabled. The correct answer was Nuclear bodies (few) but there are more than 5 spots in every cell. This probably needs to be changed to Nuclear bodies (many).

That's a problem with a lot of these. I've seen plenty of slides with one or two nuclear bodies in some and a bunch in others. Even if you select cell-to-cell variations you can only pick one of them, so which do you go with? Most of these have the community split down the middle as well. Is there a good reason to separate these? Couldn't this just be one button for "nuclear bodies"?

This image had quite a low consensus and I was very unsure how to classify it as well. First thought was: Mitochondria, but it doesn't look very "thread-like", at least I had seen images that looked quite more clearly like Mitochondria. For ER which was another possible choice it didn't look enough to me like a "spider web". Decided just for cytoplasm at the end but I'm not convinced at all. Hmmmm, what is it actually?

http://i.imgur.com/FmMBfrk.jpg

This one has little stringy things all over the place that look like mitochondria, but it's tagged as vesicles.

I've had a couple tough classifications in a row now. This one http://i.imgur.com/xElpvSz.png (100457139)

in particular had me questioning myself. I've always had trouble with cytoskeleton intermediate filaments VS Endoplasmic reticulum, but never the cytoskeleton microtubules. What exactly makes this one microtubules over the filaments? (The cytokinetic bridge is pretty obvious here)

And while I'm on the subject, the classification I had a few slides before, had me questioning between cell junctions and focal adhesions. How can I more clearly make that distinction? If that classification is correct, then sometimes cell junctions can appear even when not next to another cell (Just black space on the slide)

I'll bring this over from the other thread in the Information Center




I guess I need to go check Reddit myself. Is CCP finished with any further work on the mini-game? The reason I ask is I'm wondering if more helpful information could be a part of the module itself?

Thanks folks!

Hi, I just started today Project Discovery and so far made it to rank 4! My question is how long will this be available because this is something I been wanting to do since it was introduced earlier this year. And will there be more projects like this? Thank you

Hi Kolmogorow,

the centrosome is both. In the beginning it will be a ball but once the cell division starts it will separate and each part will migrate to the opposite poles of the cell. While doing this they are connected by the microtubuli.

I probably should have uploaded these here sooner. just found this thread and reminded me of some interrresting screenshots I took.


can anyone tell me what those "things" are?

http://i.imgur.com/8mdaZPv.png

and

http://i.imgur.com/rSEyqWD.png

sorry for not keeping the number tho.

Sample 100456307 clearly has 2 bridges answer atleast partially incorrect.

http://i.imgur.com/KxVICk4.png