MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968141095 · doi:10.1117/12.2079656

A non-stochastic iterative computational method to model light propagation in turbid media

2015· article· en· W1968141095 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas J. McIntyre, Roger J. Zemp

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodPhoton transport in biological tissueRadiative transferPhoton diffusionJacobian matrix and determinantProjection (relational algebra)Computer sciencePhysicsAlgorithmApplied mathematicsOpticsHybrid Monte CarloMarkov chain Monte CarloMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monte Carlo models are widely used to model light transport in turbid media, however their results implicitly contain stochastic variations. These fluctuations are not ideal, especially for inverse problems where Jacobian matrix errors can lead to large uncertainties upon matrix inversion. Yet Monte Carlo approaches are more computationally favorable than solving the full Radiative Transport Equation. Here, a non-stochastic computational method of estimating fluence distributions in turbid media is proposed, which is called the Non-Stochastic Propagation by Iterative Radiance Evaluation method (NSPIRE). Rather than using stochastic means to determine a random walk for each photon packet, the propagation of light from any element to all other elements in a grid is modelled simultaneously. For locally homogeneous anisotropic turbid media, the matrices used to represent scattering and projection are shown to be block Toeplitz, which leads to computational simplifications via convolution operators. To evaluate the accuracy of the algorithm, 2D simulations were done and compared against Monte Carlo models for the cases of an isotropic point source and a pencil beam incident on a semi-infinite turbid medium. The model was shown to have a mean percent error less than 2%. The algorithm represents a new paradigm in radiative transport modelling and may offer a non-stochastic alternative to modeling light transport in anisotropic scattering media for applications where the diffusion approximation is insufficient.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207