<title>Improvements to quantitative microscopy through the use of digital micromirror devices</title>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
All of the different modes of microscopy deliver light in a controlled fashion to the object to be examined and collect as much of the light containing the desired information about the object as possible. The system being presented replaces the simple circular or annular diaphragms of a conventional microscope with digital micromirror devices to enable digital light microscopy. The DMDs are placed in the optical path at positions corresponding to the field and aperture diaphragms of a conventional microscope. This allows for more precise and flexible control over the spatial location, amount, and angles of the illumination light, and the light to be collected. Digital light microscopy enables the improvement of existing modes of microscopy, specifically for quantitative microscopy applications. Confocal microscopy has been performed, realizing improvements in resolution, flexibility, and cost. Three different combinations of image acquisition and post- processing algorithms have ben sued to generate confocal images, as well as a tomographic reconstruction 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".