Raman spectroscopy for optical diagnosis in the larynx: Preliminary findings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Raman spectroscopy (RS) provides information about molecular structure and is a potential tool for non-invasive tissue diagnosis. To determine if Raman spectra could be obtained rapidly from laryngeal tissue in vitro, and compare Raman spectra from normal, benign, and cancerous laryngeal tissue. STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-seven laryngeal specimens were studied using RS with signal acquisition times (SAT) between 1 and 30 second(s). Multivariate analysis was used to determine the diagnostic ability of RS compared to standard histology (n = 18, 13, and 16 respectively for normal tissue, carcinoma, and squamous papilloma). RESULTS: Good quality spectra were obtained with 5-second SAT. Spectral peak analysis showed prediction sensitivities of 89%, 69%, and 88%, and specificities of 86%, 94%, and 94% for normal tissue, carcinoma, and papilloma. CONCLUSIONS: In the larynx, spectral differences appear to exist between normal tissue, carcinoma, and papilloma. The ability to obtain spectra rapidly supports potential for future in vivo studies.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".