MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024285040 · doi:10.1098/rsta.2013.0129

Priors for X-ray in-line phase tomography of heterogeneous objects

2014· article· en· W2024285040 on OpenAlexaff
Max Langer, Peter Cloetens, Bernhard Hesse, Heikki Suhonen, Alexandra Pacureanu, Kay Raum, Françoise Peyrin

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced X-ray Imaging Techniques
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nautical Research Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImaging phantomOpticsAttenuationPrior probabilityPhase retrievalDiffractionRaster graphicsComputer sciencePhysicsMathematicsComputer visionArtificial intelligenceMathematical analysisFourier transform

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a new prior for phase retrieval from X-ray Fresnel diffraction patterns. Fresnel diffraction patterns are achieved by letting a highly coherent X-ray beam propagate in free space after interaction with an object. Previously, either homogeneous or multi-material object assumptions have been used. The advantage of the homogeneous object assumption is that the prior can be introduced in the Radon domain. Heterogeneous object priors, on the other hand, have to be applied in the object domain. Here, we let the relationship between attenuation and refractive index vary as a function of the measured attenuation index. The method is evaluated using images acquired at beamline ID19 (ESRF, Grenoble, France) of a phantom where the prior is calculated by linear interpolation and of a healing bone obtained from a rat osteotomy model. It is shown that the ratio between attenuation and refractive index in bone for different levels of mineralization follows a power law. Reconstruction was performed using the mixed approach but is compatible with other, more advanced models. We achieve more precise reconstructions than previously reported in literature. We believe that the proposed method will find application in biomedical imaging problems where the object is strongly heterogeneous, such as bone healing and biomaterials engineering.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations27
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering SciencesSame topicAdvanced X-ray Imaging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207