MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047425696 · doi:10.1117/12.902703

Labview programming for swept-source full-field optical coherence tomography

2011· article· en· W2047425696 on OpenAlexaff
Shoude Chang, Youxin Mao, Costel Flueraru

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Coherence Tomography Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRaster scanComputer scienceRaster graphicsOptical coherence tomographyInterface (matter)SIGNAL (programming language)Coherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Computer hardwareImage processingSignal processingComputer visionComputer graphics (images)Graphical user interfaceOpticsImage (mathematics)Digital signal processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Full-field optical coherence tomography (FFOCT) acquires image data in parallel. It has a big advantage in high-speed imaging because 2-dimensional mechanical raster scanning in the sample arm, which is essentially needed in a common fiber-based OCT system, does not exist anymore. Swept-source FFOCT (SSFFOCT) further makes the system free of depth scanning that significantly increases the operation speed. National Instrument's LabVIEW is a powerful tool to fast develop optical-electronic systems which have motion/vision units, signal processing functions and easy-to-generate Graphic User Interface (GUI). In this paper, we describe the design and implementation of Labview program prepared for an SSFFOCT system. Basically, there are four modules of Labview programming in such a system: 1. Wavelength sweeping control; 2. Synchronized image grabbing; 3. SSFFOCT signal processing; 4. 3-dimensional tomogram displaying mode selection. A general graphic user interface is used to input the parameters and monitor all necessary data and curves. The tomographic images can be displayed at any given cutting direction. More details and examples are provided and discussed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.666
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.214 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicOptical Coherence Tomography ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207