Real‐time endoscopic Raman spectroscopy for<i>in vivo</i>early lung cancer detection
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently the most sensitive method for localizing lung cancers in central airways is autofluorescence bronchoscopy (AFB) in combination with white light bronchoscopy (WLB). The diagnostic accuracy of WLB + AFB for high grade dysplasia (HGD) and carcinoma in situ is variable depending on physician's experience. When WLB + AFB are operated at high diagnostic sensitivity, the associated diagnostic specificity is low. Raman spectroscopy probes molecular vibrations and gives highly specific, fingerprint-like spectral features and has high accuracy for tissue pathology classification. In this study we present the use of a real-time endoscopy Raman spectroscopy system to improve the specificity. A spectrum is acquired within 1 second and clinical data are obtained from 280 tissue sites (72 HGDs/malignant lesions, 208 benign lesions/normal sites) in 80 patients. Using multivariate analyses and waveband selection methods on the Raman spectra, we have demonstrated that HGD and malignant lung lesions can be detected with high sensitivity (90%) and good specificity (65%).
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it