Measurements of extrinsic fluorescence in Intralipid and polystyrene microspheres
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fluorescence of Intralipid and polystyrene microspheres with sphere diameter of 1 µm at a representative lipid and microsphere concentration for simulation of mucosal tissue scattering has not been a subject of extensive experimental study. In order to elucidate the quantitative relationship between lipid and microsphere concentration and the respective fluorescent intensity, the extrinsic fluorescence spectra between 360 nm and 650 nm (step size of 5 nm) were measured at different lipid concentrations (from 0.25% to 5%) and different microsphere concentrations (0.00364, 0.0073, 0.0131 spheres per cubic micrometer) using laser excitation at 355 nm with pulse energy of 2.8 µJ. Current findings indicated that Intralipid has a broadband emission between 360 and 650 nm with a primary peak at 500 nm and a secondary peak at 450 nm while polystyrene microspheres have a single peak at 500 nm. In addition, for similar scattering properties the fluorescence of Intralipid solutions is approximately three-fold stronger than that of the microsphere solutions. Furthermore, Intralipid phantoms with lipid concentrations ~2% (simulating the bottom layer of mucosa) produce up to seven times stronger fluorescent emission than phantoms with lipid concentration ~0.25% (simulating the top layer of mucosa). The fluoresence decays of Intralipid and microsphere solutions were also recorded for estimation of fluorescence lifetime.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".