Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Autofocusing in computer microscopy: selecting the optimal focus algorithm.

Yu Sun1, Stefan Duthaler, Bradley J Nelson

  • 1Advanced Micro and Nanosystems Laboratory, University of Toronto, Canada. sun@mie.utoronto.ca

Microscopy Research and Technique
|December 18, 2004
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Ossification variants of the distal femoral condyle: longitudinal 3 T MRI evidence of progression to juvenile osteochondritis dissecans in asymptomatic siblings of patients with JOCD.

Skeletal radiology·2026
Same author

Magnetoelectric microrobots for spinal cord injury regeneration.

Nature materials·2026
Same author

The Efficacy of Bracing in Nonoperative Care of Medial Femoral Condyle Osteochondritis Dissecans: A Study From the Research in Osteochondritis Dissecans of the Knee (ROCK) Study Group.

The American journal of sports medicine·2026
Same author

Magnetic continuum soft robot-driven precise delivery of prodrug nanoassemblies for gastric cancer chemo-immunotherapy.

Asian journal of pharmaceutical sciences·2026
Same author

No Difference in Knee Pain Between Bone-patellar Tendon-bone and Hamstring Autograft at 2-year Follow-up.

Orthopedics·2026
Same author

Grit is not associated with opioid consumption patterns in patients that undergo arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

JSES international·2026
Same journal

Deep Learning Based Framework for Detection and Classification of Leukemia Using Microscopic Images.

Microscopy research and technique·2026
Same journal

Externally Controlled In Situ SEM: Multi-Rate Scanning With Signal Regulation and Spatiotemporal Fusion.

Microscopy research and technique·2026
Same journal

In Situ TEM Observation of Phase Transformation Nucleation at the Near-Surface of Synthetic Aragonite.

Microscopy research and technique·2026
Same journal

Morpho-Anatomical and HPTLC Investigations of Lysimachia nummularia L. (Primulaceae) Grown in Switzerland.

Microscopy research and technique·2026
Same journal

Macroscopic, Histological and Ultrastructural Features of the Tongue of the Anatolian Wild Boar (Sus scrofa libycus).

Microscopy research and technique·2026
Same journal

Ultrastructural Insights Into the Reproductive Anatomy and Eggs of Cotton Pink Bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella Saunders (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae).

Microscopy research and technique·2026
See all related articles

This study ranks 18 autofocusing algorithms for microscopy by analyzing 139,000 images. It provides guidelines to select the best algorithm for various biological and biomedical imaging applications.

Area of Science:

  • Microscopy and Imaging Technologies
  • Computational Biology
  • Biomedical Engineering

Background:

  • Automated microscopy is crucial for large-scale biological and biomedical analyses.
  • Effective autofocusing is essential for routine and high-throughput microscopic imaging.
  • Current autofocusing algorithms vary in performance across different imaging conditions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To comprehensively compare the performance of 18 autofocusing algorithms.
  • To establish a ranking methodology for focus algorithms based on extensive image analysis.
  • To provide practical guidelines for selecting optimal autofocusing methods in microscopy.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of 139,000 microscope images across six samples.
  • Evaluation under three observation methods: brightfield, phase contrast, and differential interference contrast (DIC).

Related Experiment Videos

  • Testing at two magnifications (100x and 400x) with and without image preprocessing.

    • Main Results:

    • A detailed performance comparison and ranking of 18 autofocusing algorithms.
    • Identification of algorithm performance variations based on imaging conditions and preprocessing.
    • Robustness assessment of algorithms under diverse microscopy settings.

    Conclusions:

    • A proposed ranking methodology effectively evaluates autofocusing algorithms.
    • Guidelines are provided for selecting the most suitable algorithm for specific microscopy applications.
    • This work facilitates the optimization of automated microscopy workflows in research and diagnostics.