MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003309781 · doi:10.1364/oe.18.007456

A novel first principles approach for the estimation of the sieve factor of blood samples

2010· article· en· W2003309781 on OpenAlexaff
Lesley Northam, Gladimir V. G. Baranoski

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Express · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLight scatteringOpticsSieve (category theory)TraverseBiological systemTransmittanceComputer scienceLight intensityFlexibility (engineering)Materials scienceScatteringPhysicsMathematicsStatisticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Light may traverse a turbid material, such as blood, without encountering any of its pigment containing structures, a phenomenon known as sieve effect. This phenomenon may result in a decrease in the amount of light absorbed by the material. Accordingly, the corresponding sieve factor needs to be accounted for in optical investigations aimed at the derivation of blood biophysical properties from light transmittance measurements. The existing procedures used for its estimation either lack the flexibility required for practical applications or are based on general formulas that incorporate other light and matter interaction phenomena such as detour (scattering) effects. In this paper, a ray optics framework is proposed to estimate the sieve factor for blood samples. It employs a first principles approach to account for the distribution, orientation and shape of the cells that contain hemoglobin, the essential (oxygen-carrying) pigment found in human blood. Within this framework, ray-casting techniques are used to determine the probability that light can traverse a blood sample without encountering any of these cells. The predictive capabilities of the proposed framework are demonstrated through a series of in silico experiments. Its effectiveness is further illustrated by visualizations depicting the different blood parameterizations considered in the simulations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.191

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics ExpressSame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207