MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130567603 · doi:10.1117/1.jbo.18.12.121515

Digital image correlation–based optical coherence elastography

2013· article· en· W2130567603 on OpenAlexafffund
Cuiru Sun, Beau A. Standish, Barry Vuong, Xiao‐Yan Wen, Victor X. D. Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Optics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMitacs
KeywordsImaging phantomDigital image correlationOptical coherence tomographyMaterials scienceElastographySpeckle patternBiomedical engineeringImage resolutionOpticsAcousticsUltrasoundMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optical coherence elastography (OCE) provides deformation or material properties, mapping of soft tissue. We aim to develop a robust speckle tracking OCE technique with improved resolution and accuracy. A digital image correlation (DIC)-based OCE technique was developed by combining an advanced DIC algorithm with optical coherence tomography (OCT). System calibration and measurement error evaluation demonstrated that this DIC-based OCE technique had a resolution of ~0.6 μm displacement and <0.5% strain measurement in the axial scan direction. The measured displacement ranged from 0.6 to 150 μm, obtained via phantom imaging. The capability of the DIC-based OCE technique, for differentiation of stiffness, was evaluated by imaging a candle gel phantom with an irregularly shaped stiff inclusion. OCE imaging of a chicken breast sample differentiated the fat, membrane, and muscle layers. Strain elastograms of an aneurysm sample showed heterogeneity of the tissue and clear contrast between the adventitia and media. These promising results demonstrated the capability of the DIC-based OCE for the characterization of the various components of the tissue sample. Further improvement of the system will be conducted to make this OCE technique a practical tool for measuring and differentiating material properties of soft tissue.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations51
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical OpticsSame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207