MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2300427720 · doi:10.1117/12.2209387

Multiple-illumination photoacoustic tomography

2016· article· en· W2300427720 on OpenAlexaff
Quinn Barber, Roger J. Zemp

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTomographyPhotoacoustic imaging in biomedicinePhotoacoustic tomographyComputer scienceOpticsComputer visionMaterials scienceMedical physicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previously we described the potential for multiple illumination photoacoustic tomography to provide quantitative reconstructions, however this work used only simulated data. We have developed a custom photoacoustic-ultrasound tomography system capable of multiple illuminations and parallel acquisition from a 256 element 5 MHz transducer ring array with 8-cm diameter. The multiple illumination scheme uses a free-space light delivery geometry where a rotational stage scans a pulsed laser beam onto different incident locations around the sample. For each illumination location a photoacoustic image is reconstructed using a modified backprojection algorithm. Images from different source locations have the potential to be combined to form an improved deep-tissue image using our previously developed iterative algorithms. We complement the photoacoustic imaging data with unique ultrasound imaging data. Most previous ultrasound tomography methods have used migration algorithms, iterative ray-based analysis, wave-equation modeling, or frequency-based algorithms that all demand large amounts of data and computational power. We propose a new UST method that offers isotropic resolution, provides scattering contrast, as well as the potential for measuring ultrasound scattering anisotropy and decoupling density and compressibility contributions. The imaging system is driven by a Verasonics scan engine and programmed for both ultrasound and photoacoustic imaging modes. Resolution has been measured to be 150 μm for ultrasound and 200 μm for photoacoustic images. Imaging capabilities are demonstrated on phantoms with custom-tailored ultrasound scattering and optical properties, as well as in murine models.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207