MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1931446761 · doi:10.1109/isbi.2002.1029436

A shape reconstruction method for diffuse optical tomography using a transport model and level sets

2003· article· en· W1931446761 on OpenAlexaff
Oliver Dorn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInverse problemDiffuse optical imagingIterative reconstructionTomographyBoundary (topology)AlgorithmInverseOptical tomographyNonlinear systemField (mathematics)Mathematical analysisComputer scienceMathematicsOpticsPhysicsGeometryComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A two-step shape reconstruction method for diffuse optical tomography (DOT) is presented which uses adjoint fields and level sets. The propagation of near-infrared photons in tissue is modeled by the time-dependent linear transport equation, of which the absorption parameter has to be reconstructed from boundary measurements. In the shape reconstruction approach, it is assumed that the inhomogeneous background absorption parameter and the values inside the obstacles are (approximately) known, but that the number, sizes, shapes, and locations of these obstacles have to be reconstructed from the data. An additional difficulty arises due to the presence of so-called clear regions in the medium. The first step of the reconstruction scheme is a transport-backtransport (TBT) method which provides us with a low-contrast approximation to the sought objects. The second step uses this result as an initial guess for solving the shape reconstruction problem. A key point in this second step is the fusion of the 'level set technique' for representing the shapes of the reconstructed obstacles, and an 'adjoint-field technique' for solving the nonlinear inverse problem. Numerical experiments are presented which show that this novel method is able to recover one or more objects very fast and with good accuracy.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207