MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111520164 · doi:10.1364/ol.32.000253

Wide dynamic range detection of bidirectional flow in Doppler optical coherence tomography using a two-dimensional Kasai estimator

2007· article· en· W2111520164 on OpenAlexaff
Darren Morofke, Michael C. Kolios, I. Alex Vitkin, Victor X. D. Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Letters · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Coherence Tomography Applications
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity Health NetworkToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptical coherence tomographyDoppler effectOpticsEstimatorPhysicsTransverse planePulsatile flowFlow velocityOptical flowBlood flowFlow (mathematics)MathematicsComputer scienceMedicineComputer visionImage (mathematics)Mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We demonstrate extended axial flow velocity detection range in a time-domain Doppler optical coherence tomography (DOCT) system using a modified Kasai velocity estimator with computations in both the axial and transverse directions. For a DOCT system with an 8 kHz rapid-scanning optical delay line, bidirectional flow experiments showed a maximum detectable speed of >56 cm/s using the axial Kasai estimator without the occurrence of aliasing, while the transverse Kasai estimator preserved the approximately 7 microm/s minimum detectable velocity to slow flow. By using a combination of transverse Kasai and axial Kasai estimators, the velocity detection dynamic range was over 100 dB. Through a fiber-optic endoscopic catheter, in vivoM-mode transesophageal imaging of the pulsatile blood flow in rat aorta was demonstrated, for what is for the first time to our knowledge, with measured peak systolic blood flow velocity of >1 m/s, while maintaining good sensitivity to detect aortic wall motion at <2 mm/s, using this 2D Kasai technique.

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)0.003
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.240
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations25
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics LettersSame topicOptical Coherence Tomography ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207