Two-photon excitation fluorescence microscopy with a high depth of field using an axicon
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In conventional two-photon excitation fluorescence microscopy, the numerical aperture of the objective determines the lateral resolution and the depth of field. In some situations, as with functional imaging of dynamic events distributed in live biological tissue, an improved temporal resolution is needed; as a consequence, it is imperative to use optics with a high depth of field to simultaneously image objects at different axial positions. With a conventional microscope objective, increasing the depth of field is achieved at the expense of lateral resolution. To overcome this limitation, we have incorporated an axicon in a two-photon excitation fluorescence microscopy system; measurements have shown that an axicon provides a depth of field in excess of a millimeter, while the lateral resolution is maintained at the micrometer scale. Thus axicon-based two-photon microscopy has been shown to yield a high-resolution projection image of a sample with a single 2D scan of the laser beam while maintaining the improved tissue penetration typical of two-photon microscopy.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it