Effects of erythrocyte oxygenation on optoacoustic signals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A theoretical model examining the effects of erythrocyte oxygenation on optoacoustic (OA) signals is presented. Each erythrocyte is considered as a fluid sphere and its optical absorption is defined by its oxygen saturation state. The OA field generated by a cell is computed by solving the wave equation in the frequency domain with appropriate boundary conditions. The resultant field from many cells is simulated by summing the pressure waves emitted by individual cells. A Monte Carlo algorithm generates 2-D spatially random distributions of oxygenated and deoxygenated erythrocytes. Oxygen saturation levels of oxygenated cells a assumed to be 100% and 0% for deoxygenated cells. The OA signal amplitude decreases monotonically for the 700-nm laser source and increases monotonically for 1000 nm optical radiation when blood oxygen saturation varies from 0 to 100%. An approximately sixfold decrease and fivefold increase of the OA signal amplitude were computed at those wavelengths, respectively. The OA spectral power in the low-frequency range (<10 MHz) and in the very high-frequency range (>100 MHz) decreases for 700 nm and increases for 1000 nm with increasing blood oxygen saturation. This model provides a theoretical framework to study the erythrocyte oxygenation-dependent OA signals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".