Refractive index of solutions of human hemoglobin from the near-infrared to the ultraviolet range: Kramers-Kronig analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Because direct measurements of the refractive index of hemoglobin over a large wavelength range are challenging, indirect methods deserve particular attention. Among them, the Kramers-Kronig relations are a powerful tool often used to derive the real part of a refractive index from its imaginary part. However, previous attempts to apply the relations to solutions of human hemoglobin have been somewhat controversial, resulting in disagreement between several studies. We show that this controversy can be resolved when careful attention is paid not only to the absorption of hemoglobin but also to the dispersion of the refractive index of the nonabsorbing solvent. We present a Kramers-Kroning analysis taking both contributions into account and compare the results with the data from several studies. Good agreement with experiments is found across the visible and parts of near-infrared and ultraviolet regions. These results reinstate the use of the Kramers-Kronig relations for hemoglobin solutions and provide an additional source of information about their refractive index.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it