MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083251631 · doi:10.1117/12.779123

Compressive sampling in photo-acoustic imaging

2007· article· en· W2083251631 on OpenAlexaff
Jean Provost, Frédéric Lesage

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompressed sensingIterative reconstructionInverse problemComputer scienceTomographySampling (signal processing)Image resolutionProjection (relational algebra)Computer visionOpticsDiffuse optical imagingArtificial intelligencePhysicsAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photo-acoustic (PA) imaging has been developped for different purposes but recent years has seen the technique gain 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 mid-range depths (3mm-10mm). However, a typical acquisition for the reconstruction of one slice in PA tomography can take up to approximatively 30 minutes which is clearly prohibitive for 3D imaging. This paper suggests a new reconstruction strategy using the compressive sampling formalism which states that a small number of linear projection of a compressible image contains enough information for reconstruction. This new scheme allows perfect reconstruction of numerical phantoms with only a fraction of the measurements normally needed with classical methods such as the pseudo-inverse.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207