MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2198815216 · doi:10.1088/2057-1976/1/4/045207

Time-domain diffuse optical tomography using recursive direct method of calculating Jacobian at selected temporal points

2015· article· en· W2198815216 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohamed A. Naser, M. Jamal Deen

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Physics & Engineering Express · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Institutes of HealthCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsJacobian matrix and determinantComputationAlgorithmDiffuse optical imagingTime domainComputer scienceDomain (mathematical analysis)Temporal resolutionMathematicsIterative reconstructionComputer visionOpticsApplied mathematicsMathematical analysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An algorithm for time-domain diffuse optical tomography based on the resolution of the time-domain diffusion equation using the finite element method has been developed. An efficient direct method including a recursive approach has been used to obtain the light fluence derivatives with respect to tissue optical properties at precise selected points on the temporal profile resulting in a considerable savings in computation time and memory. The algorithm reconstructs the tissue optical properties in a permissible region or a region-of-interest and the input data for reconstruction comprises selections of points on the temporal curve of the measured pulse. The optical properties have been reconstructed by solving an iterative normalized minimization problem. The algorithm has been applied to a three-dimensional simplified model of a new born baby head and to a three-dimensional model of the mouse (MOBY) for a small animal model. The computation speed and memory usage of the algorithm have been compared with that of other techniques based on continuous wave and frequency domain representations. The effects of using different sizes of time steps and number of time steps on the reconstruction accuracy and the computation time have been reported.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedical Physics & Engineering ExpressSame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207