A comparison of methods using optical coherence tomography to detect demineralized regions in teeth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is a three- dimensional optical imaging technique that can be used to identify areas of early caries formation in dental enamel. The OCT signal at 850 nm back-reflected from sound enamel is attenuated stronger than the signal back-reflected from demineralized regions. To quantify this observation, the OCT signal as a function of depth into the enamel (also known as the A-scan intensity), the histogram of the A-scan intensities and three summary parameters derived from the A-scan are defined and their diagnostic potential compared. A total of 754 OCT A-scans were analyzed. The three summary parameters derived from the A-scans, the OCT attenuation coefficient as well as the mean and standard deviation of the lognormal fit to the histogram of the A-scan ensemble show statistically significant differences (p < 0.01) when comparing parameters from sound enamel and caries. Furthermore, these parameters only show a modest correlation. Based on the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) plot, the OCT attenuation coefficient shows higher discriminatory capacity (AUC = 0.98) compared to the parameters derived from the lognormal fit to the histogram of the A-scan. However, direct analysis of the A-scans or the histogram of A-scan intensities using linear support vector machine classification shows diagnostic discrimination (AUC = 0.96) comparable to that achieved using the attenuation coefficient. These findings suggest that either direct analysis of the A-scan, its intensity histogram or the attenuation coefficient derived from the descending slope of the OCT A-scan have high capacity to discriminate between regions of caries and sound enamel.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".