MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139792068 · doi:10.1364/oe.15.015747

Speckle noise reduction algorithm for optical coherence tomography based on interval type II fuzzy set

2007· article· en· W2139792068 on OpenAlexafffund
Prabakar Puvanathasan, Kostadinka Bizheva

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Express · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Coherence Tomography Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSpeckle noiseSpeckle patternAlgorithmOptical coherence tomographyNoise reductionWaveletNoise (video)Median filterGaussian noiseArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceThresholdingWavelet transformImage noiseOpticsMathematicsComputer visionImage processingImage (mathematics)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel speckle reduction technique based on soft thresholding of wavelet coefficients using interval type II fuzzy system was developed for reducing speckle noise in Optical Coherence Tomography images. The proposed algorithm is an extension of a recently published method for filtering additive Gaussian noise by use of type I fuzzy system. Unlike type I, interval type II fuzzy based thresholding filter considers the uncertainty in the calculated threshold and the wavelet coefficient is adjusted based on this uncertainty. A single parameter controls the signal-to-noise (SNR) improvement. Application of this novel algorithm to optical coherence tomograms acquired in-vivo from a human finger tip show reduction in the speckle noise with little edge blurring and image SNR improvement of about 10dB. Comparison with adaptive Wiener and adaptive Lee filters, applied to the same image, demonstrated the superior performance of the fuzzy type II algorithm in terms of image metrics improvement.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations91
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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