MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119403780 · doi:10.1117/12.611825

2D parallel optical coherence tomography and multiple-layer information extraction

2005· article· en· W2119403780 on OpenAlexaff
Shoude Chang, Xianyang Cai, E. G. Murdock, Costel Flueraru

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Coherence Tomography Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptical coherence tomographyComputer scienceCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Computer visionIdentification (biology)Artificial intelligenceTomographyLayer (electronics)Pattern recognition (psychology)OpticsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the past decade, optical coherence tomography (OCT) has been vigorously developed into a powerful tool for biomedical diagnosis applications. Because this technology has the nature of extracting the internal features of an object, its applications can be extended to document security, biometrics identification, and industrial inspection. In addition, its high imaging resolution makes OCT an ideal tool for massive storage/retrieval of 3D data. In this paper, we propose the 2D parallel OCT system and its application for multiple-layer information retrieval. We will study the issues that exist exclusively in this type of application, such as interlayer phase/intensity modulation and the parasitic fringe patterns resulting from the surfaces of the information layer. The basic procedure of the proposed OCT system includes three steps: 1) extraction of cross-section raw images at each layer of an object; 2) removal of the interfering fringes by algorithm derived from multiple phase-shifted images; 3) elimination of interlayer modulations and parasitic patterns. Other issues that may degrade the retrieved images are also discussed. The simulation results and experimental tomography obtained from different testing samples are presented and discussed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicOptical Coherence Tomography ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207