Temperature measurement artefacts of thermocouples and fluoroptic probes during laser irradiation at 810 nm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the artefact induced in temperature measurements made with thermocouples and Luxtron fluoroptic probes in the presence of infrared radiation. Localized heating was created using a continuous-wave, 810 nm diode laser system emitting 2.0 W from a cylindrical diffusing optical fibre, in air, water and an agar-albumin phantom. The temperature was measured every 1.0 s for 10 to 150 s, with both a thermocouple and a Luxtron fluoroptic probe at distances of 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 mm from the cylindrical diffusing tip. In all cases, the fluoroptic probe recorded a higher temperature than the thermocouple during laser irradiation. The difference in measured temperatures between the Luxtron probe and the thermocouple ranged from 1.6 degrees C to 18.8 degrees C in air, from 0.3 degrees C to 10.2 degrees C in water, and from 1.4 degrees C to 10.1 degrees C in phantom, depending on the distance of the probe from the laser source. The results suggest that in the presence of laser irradiation, self-heating of the Luxtron probe induces a significant artefact in temperature measurements at distances less than 4 mm from the source fibre. As a result, fluoroptic probes may not be suitable for monitoring tissue temperature for treatments when laser irradiation is present if sensors are located close to the fibre tip (<4 mm).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".