MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092836202 · doi:10.1117/12.2040580

S-sequence patterned illumination for fixed-point iterative multiple illumination photoacoustic tomography

2014· article· en· W2092836202 on OpenAlexaff
Tyler Harrison, Peng Shao, Roger J. Zemp

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegularization (linguistics)AlgorithmDecoding methodsComputer scienceSequence (biology)Image restorationIterative reconstructionIterative methodNoise (video)Convergence (economics)UniquenessOpticsMathematicsComputer visionArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)PhysicsImage processingMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fixed-point iteration shows promise for quantitative reconstruction of optical absorption in photoacoustic tomography. However, there are issues that prevent the technique from being practical including: non-uniqueness of scattering and absorption profiles, divergence with over-iteration, and sensitivity to noise. Multiple illumination has been proposed to deal with the first problem, and may help with the second. The issue of noise may be balanced out by increasing the regularization parameter at the expense of the exactness of the reconstruction. In a multiple-illumination setup with a circular geometry where fluence is abundant, using a patterned illumination with a decoding step may provide an alternative which will boost SNR. We present a simple sequence of patterned illuminations based on an S-sequence that serves to improve SNR. While the forward model of the iterative method may be applied directly to the patterned excitations, including the decoding step improves SNR in an individual image by a factor equal to the size of the S-sequence, thus greatly improving convergence for a given value of regularization and SNR. For example, with 15 illuminations, 50-60dB noise levels with S-sequence patterned illuminations gives similar simulated performance to the 70dB case with single-source illuminations. This technique will allow the application of fixed-point iteration techniques in a broader range of SNR conditions without resorting to averaging.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.208 · 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
Published2014
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