MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973279763 · doi:10.1155/2012/565823

Dual-Source Swept-Source Optical Coherence Tomography Reconstructed on Integrated Spectrum

2011· article· en· W1973279763 on OpenAlexaff
Shoude Chang, Youxin Mao, Costel Flueraru

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Optics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Coherence Tomography Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaInstitute for Microstructural Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptical coherence tomographyTomographyOpticsLaser linewidthPhysicsMerge (version control)Iterative reconstructionCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)WavelengthComputer scienceComputer visionLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dual-source swept-source optical coherence tomography (DS-SSOCT) has two individual sources with different central wavelengths, linewidth, and bandwidths. Because of the difference between the two sources, the individually reconstructed tomograms from each source have different aspect ratio, which makes the comparison and integration difficult. We report a method to merge two sets of DS-SSOCT raw data in a common spectrum, on which both data have the same spectrum density and a correct separation. The reconstructed tomographic image can seamlessly integrate the two bands of OCT data together. The final image has higher axial resolution and richer spectroscopic information than any of the individually reconstructed tomography image.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of OpticsSame topicOptical Coherence Tomography ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207