MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126132219 · doi:10.1117/12.764651

Enhanced angular domain optical imaging by background scattered light subtraction from a deviated laser source

2008· article· en· W2126132219 on OpenAlexaff
Fartash Vasefi, Glenn H. Chapman, Paulman K. Y. Chan, Bożena Kamińska, Nick Pfeiffer

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Coherence Tomography Applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpticsPhysicsScatteringCollimated lightLaserImaging phantomViewing angleLight scattering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Imaging structures within a turbid medium using Angular Domain Imaging (ADI) employs angular filter array aligned to a laser source to separate ballistic and quasi-ballistic photons from the highly scattered light by means of angular filtration. The angular filter consists of a high aspect ratio linear array of silicon micromachined tunnels, 51 micron wide by 10mm long with a 0.29 degree acceptance angle. At heavy scattering ratios of >1E7 image detectability declines due to the non-uniform scattered background light fraction still within the acceptance angle. This scattered signal can be separated out by introducing a wedge prism to deviate the laser source where it enters the medium by an angle slightly larger than the acceptance angle. This creates a second image consisting of pure scattering photons with the filtration characteristics of the angular filter, and a pixel by pixel correspondence to the fully scattered illumination emitted from the medium. Experiments used an 808 nm laser diode, collimated to an 8×1 mm line of light, entering a 5cm thick medium with a scattering ratio of > 1E6, with a wedge prism creating a 0.44 degree deviation. Digitally subtracting the deviated scattered signal from the original image significantly reduced the scattered background and enhanced image contrast. We can have about images at least 40 times more of our previous scattering limits. Depending on test phantom object location, the contrast level can be increased from 4% of the total dynamic range to over 50% which results in higher definition and visibility of our micro-scale test structures in the turbid medium.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations4
Published2008
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