MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1560035638 · doi:10.1117/1.jbo.20.7.075006

Deformation-induced speckle-pattern evolution and feasibility of correlational speckle tracking in optical coherence elastography

2015· article· en· W1560035638 on OpenAlexaff
Vladimir Y. Zaitsev, Alexander L. Matveyev, Lev A. Matveev, Grigory V. Gelikonov, Valentin M. Gelikonov, I. Alex Vitkin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Optics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptical measurement and interference techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersLobachevsky State University of Nizhny NovgorodRussian Foundation for Basic Research
KeywordsSpeckle patternOptical coherence tomographyDigital image correlationOpticsSpeckle imagingCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Speckle noiseContext (archaeology)Computer scienceImage processingTracking (education)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionElectronic speckle pattern interferometryDigital image processingPhysicsImage (mathematics)Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Feasibility of speckle tracking in optical coherence tomography (OCT) based on digital image correlation (DIC) is discussed in the context of elastography problems. Specifics of applying DIC methods to OCT, compared to processing of photographic images in mechanical engineering applications, are emphasized and main complications are pointed out. Analytical arguments are augmented by accurate numerical simulations of OCT speckle patterns. In contrast to DIC processing for displacement and strain estimation in photographic images, the accuracy of correlational speckle tracking in deformed OCT images is strongly affected by the coherent nature of speckles, for which strain-induced complications of speckle “blinking” and “boiling” are typical. The tracking accuracy is further compromised by the usually more pronounced pixelated structure of OCT scans compared with digital photographic images in classical DIC applications. Processing of complex-valued OCT data (comprising both amplitude and phase) compared to intensity-only scans mitigates these deleterious effects to some degree. Criteria of the attainable speckle tracking accuracy and its dependence on the key OCT system parameters are established.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations67
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical OpticsSame topicOptical measurement and interference techniquesFrench-language works237,207