Added soft tissue contrast using signal attenuation and the fractal dimension for optical coherence tomography images of porcine arterial tissue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optical coherence tomography (OCT) images of left-descending coronary tissues harvested from three porcine specimens were acquired with a home-build swept-source OCT setup. Despite the fact that OCT is capable of acquiring high resolution circumferential images of vessels, many distinct histological features of a vessel have comparable optical properties leading to poor contrast in OCT images. Two classification methods were tested in this report for the purpose of enhancing contrast between soft-tissue components of porcine coronary vessels. One method involved analyzing the attenuation of the OCT signal as a function of light penetration into the tissue. We demonstrated that by analyzing the signal attenuation in this manner we were able to differentiate two media sub-layers with different orientations of the smooth muscle cells. The other classification method used in our study was fractal analysis. Fractal analysis was implemented in a box-counting (fractal dimension) image-processing code and was used as a tool to differentiate and quantify variations in tissue texture at various locations in the OCT images. The calculated average fractal dimensions had different values in distinct regions of interest (ROI) within the imaged coronary samples. When compared to the results obtained by using the attenuation of the OCT signal, the method of fractal analysis demonstrated better classification potential for distinguishing amongst the tissue ROI.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".