MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152314931 · doi:10.1002/lsm.20150

Thin cylindrical diffusers in multimode Ge-doped silica fibers

2005· article· en· W2152314931 on OpenAlexaff
Lothar Lilge, Leonid Vesselov, William L. H. Whittington

Bibliographic record

VenueLasers in Surgery and Medicine · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhotodynamic Therapy Research Studies
Canadian institutionsWalsh Medical Devices (Canada)University Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMaterials scienceOpticsRadianceCommon emitterOptical fiberCladding (metalworking)AzimuthBend radiusRADIUSOptoelectronicsComposite materialBendingPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Cylindrical fiber diffusers are common tools in photodynamic therapy (PDT). However, large outer diameter and short length limit the indications to which they can be applied. Here a diffuser with an outer diameter of 250 microm and an active length exceeding 5 cm was developed. STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS: Diffusers based on photosensitive quartz optical fibers with a cladding diameter of 140 microm were developed using a structured beam from an excimer laser. A complete set of photometric characteristics, including longitudinal, polar, and azimuth radiance emission diagrams were collected. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The longitudinal radiance emission is homogenous to within +/-10%. The ability to create custom designed longitudinal emission profiles was demonstrated. The variations of the polar and azimuth radiance emission diagrams were within +/- 15% from an ideal Lambertian emitter. The polar uniformity can be improved with a slight increase of the outer diameter using a diffusing recoating compound. The residual light leakage at the distal end of the fiber diffuser was suppressed to 2%. The minimal bending radius after recoating is approximately 5 mm. Maximum power distribution is > 0.5 W cm(-1).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations19
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLasers in Surgery and MedicineSame topicPhotodynamic Therapy Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207