MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077925928 · doi:10.1109/tmi.2008.2007825

The Application of Compressed Sensing for Photo-Acoustic Tomography

2008· article· en· W2077925928 on OpenAlexaff
Jean Provost, Frédéric Lesage

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIterative reconstructionCompressed sensingComputer scienceTomographyComputer visionArtificial intelligenceImage qualityMedical imagingImage resolutionReconstruction algorithmOpticsPhysicsImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photo-acoustic (PA) imaging has been developed for different purposes, but recently, the modality has gained interest with applications to small animal imaging. As a technique it is sensitive to endogenous optical contrast present in tissues and, contrary to diffuse optical imaging, it promises to bring high resolution imaging for in vivo studies at midrange depths (3-10 mm). Because of the limited amount of radiation tissues can be exposed to, existing reconstruction algorithms for circular tomography require a great number of measurements and averaging, implying long acquisition times. Time-resolved PA imaging is therefore possible only at the cost of complex and expensive electronics. This paper suggests a new reconstruction strategy using the compressed sensing formalism which states that a small number of linear projections of a compressible image contain enough information for reconstruction. By directly sampling the image to recover in a sparse representation, it is possible to dramatically reduce the number of measurements needed for a given quality of reconstruction.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 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

Citations313
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Medical ImagingSame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207