MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100908582 · doi:10.1002/bip.10056

Near‐IR spectroscopic imaging for skin hydration: The long and the short of it

2002· article· en· W2100908582 on OpenAlexaff
E. Michael Attas, Michael G. Sowa, Trevor B. Posthumus, Bernhard J. Schattka, Henry H. Mantsch, Shuliang L. Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueBiopolymers · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Institute for Biodiagnostics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWavelengthMonochromatic colorMoisturizerChemistryHuman skinPenetration depthAbsorption (acoustics)Penetration (warfare)Imaging spectroscopyOpticsReflectivityNear-infrared spectroscopyVisible spectrumBiomedical engineeringSpectroscopyMaterials scienceOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Near-IR spectroscopic methods have been developed to determine the degree of hydration of human skin in vivo. Noncontact reflectance spectroscopic imaging was used to investigate the distribution of skin moisture as a function of location. A human study in a clinical setting has generated quantitative data showing the effects of a drying agent and a moisturizer on delineated regions of the forearms of eight volunteers. Two digital imaging systems equipped with liquid-crystal tunable filters were used to collect stacks of monochromatic images at 10-nm intervals over the 650-1050 and 960-1700 nm wavelength bands. Synthetic images generated from measurements of water absorption band areas at three different near-IR wavelengths (970, 1200, and 1450 nm) showed obvious differences in the apparent distribution of water in the skin. Changes resulting from the skin treatments were much more evident in the long-wavelength images than in the short-wavelength ones. The variable sensitivity of the method at different wavelengths has been interpreted as being the result of different penetration depths of the IR light used in the reflectance studies.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations52
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiopolymersSame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207