Guidance of hard tissue ablation by forward-viewing optical coherence tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A key issue in laser surgery is the inability for the human operator to stop the laser irradiation in time while cutting/ablating delicate tissue layers. In the present work, we forward-image through the laser machining front in complex biological tissue (dense bovine bone) to monitor the incision's approach to subsurface interfaces in real-time (47-312 kHz line rate). Feedback from imaging is used to stop the drilling process within 150 micron of a targeted interface. This is accomplished by combining the high temporal and spatial resolution of infrared optical coherence tomography (OCT) with a robust, turn-key, high brightness fiber laser. The high sensitivity of the imaging system (~100 dB) permit imaging through the rapidly changing beam path even with the additional scattering caused by the thermal cutting process. In spectral-domain OCT, the imaging acquisition period is easily locked to the machining laser exposure. Though motion-induced artifacts reduce interface contrast, they do not introduce incorrect depth measurements as found in other OCT variants. Standard tomography imaging of the tissue (B-scans) is also recorded <i>in situ</i> before and after laser processing to highlight morphology changes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".