MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150645204 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2009.2032160

Chemometric Approach for Improving VCSEL-Based Glucose Predictions

2009· article· en· W2150645204 on OpenAlexaff
Sahba Talebi Fard, Lukas Chrostowski, Ezra Kwok, Markus‐Christian Amann

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSpectroscopy Techniques in Biomedical and Chemical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaserMaterials sciencePreprocessorVertical-cavity surface-emitting laserAbsorption (acoustics)Partial least squares regressionSpectral lineOptoelectronicsOpticsComputer scienceBiomedical engineeringArtificial intelligencePhysicsMedicineMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optical methods are one of the painless and promising techniques that can be used for blood glucose predictions for diabetes patients. The use of thermally tunable vertical cavity surface-emitting lasers (VCSELs) as the light source to obtain blood absorption spectra, along with the multivariate technique partial least squares for analysis and glucose estimation, has been demonstrated. With further improvements by using data preprocessing and two VCSELs, we have achieved a clinically acceptable level in the physiological range in buffered solutions. The results of previous experiments conducted using white light showed that increasing the number of wavelength intervals used in the analysis improves the accuracy of prediction. The average prediction error, using absorption spectra from one VCSEL in aqueous solution, is about 1.2 mM. This error is reduced to 0.8 mM using absorption spectra from two VCSELs. This result confirms that increasing the number of VCSELs improves the accuracy of prediction.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.775

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.264
Teacher spread0.255 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicSpectroscopy Techniques in Biomedical and Chemical ResearchFrench-language works237,207