Development of a laser speckle imaging system for measuring relative blood flow velocity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Determining the viability of damaged or surgically reconstructed tissue is critical in most plastic and reconstructive surgery procedures. Information about tissue blood flow in the region in question can make this determination much easier. Laser speckle imaging (LSI) is one technique that could potentially aid in making this determination. LSI is a non-contact full-field imaging technique with simultaneous high spatial and temporal resolution. Tissue is illuminated with diffuse red laser light and the spatial and/or temporal statistics of the resulting speckle pattern can be used to calculate relative flow velocities. We have developed a LSI system that produces relative velocity blood flow images. Bench tests of the system indicate that it may be used to distinguish between normal, decreased, and increased blood flow states of a human finger. The system has also been used to take some initial laboratory measurements using an animal model - an epigastric free flap on a rat. Preliminary results indicate that the method may be used to distinguish states of venous or arterial occlusion from unoccluded states of the skin flap. While further experimentation is necessary, these initial results indicate that LSI could be a useful aid to the plastic surgeon for assessing tissue viability.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".