MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065923699 · doi:10.1088/0266-5611/23/3/026

Expanding the domain of contraction mapping in the inverse problem of imaging with incoherently scattered radiation

2007· article· en· W2065923699 on OpenAlexaff
Esam M.A. Hussein, John T C Bowles

Bibliographic record

VenueInverse Problems · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInverse problemMathematicsNonlinear systemContraction (grammar)InverseInverse scattering problemContraction mappingScalingPixelRange (aeronautics)AlgorithmApplied mathematicsMathematical optimizationMathematical analysisComputer scienceComputer visionPhysicsGeometryFixed point

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A mathematical formulation that provides a converging solution for the successive approximation solution of the inverse problem of imaging with incoherently scattered radiation is introduced. The nonlinear nature of this problem can cause its solution to oscillate between two physically acceptable domains. By nonlinear scaling of the forward problem, it is shown that the range of one of the two domains can be made to expand at the expense of the other. This enables contraction mapping of the iterative solution of the inverse problem over an extended domain. The mathematical features of this scaling approach are analytically demonstrated for a one-pixel inverse problem, to elucidate its features and limitations. Reconstruction for many-pixel tomographic images is then presented for ideal (error free) and noisy simulated measurements, demonstrating the ability of the presented scheme to solve the inverse problem for radiation scatter imaging over a wide range of physically acceptable attributes.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInverse ProblemsSame topicMedical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207