MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2520637734 · doi:10.1002/jbio.201600072

Laser thermal therapy monitoring using complex differential variance in optical coherence tomography

2016· article· en· W2520637734 on OpenAlexfundno aff
William Chun Yip Lo, Néstor Uribe‐Patarroyo, Ahhyun S. Nam, Martin Villiger, Benjamin J. Vakoc, Brett E. Bouma

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biophotonics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Coherence Tomography Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsOptical coherence tomographyImage resolutionBiomedical engineeringLaserTemporal resolutionOpticsMaterials scienceMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional thermal therapy monitoring techniques based on temperature are often invasive, limited by point sampling, and are indirect measures of tissue injury, while techniques such as magnetic resonance and ultrasound thermometry are limited by their spatial resolution. The visualization of the thermal coagulation zone at high spatial resolution is particularly critical to the precise delivery of thermal energy to epithelial lesions. In this work, an integrated thulium laser thermal therapy monitoring system was developed based on complex differential variance (CDV), which enables the 2D visualization of the dynamics of the thermal coagulation process at high spatial and temporal resolution with an optical frequency domain imaging system. With proper calibration to correct for noise, the CDV-based technique was shown to accurately delineate the thermal coagulation zone, which is marked by the transition from high CDV upon heating to a significantly reduced CDV once the tissue is coagulated, in 3 different tissue types ex vivo: skin, retina, and esophagus. The ability to delineate thermal lesions in multiple tissue types at high resolution opens up the possibility of performing microscopic image-guided procedures in a vast array of epithelial applications ranging from dermatology, ophthalmology, to gastroenterology and beyond.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations23
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of BiophotonicsSame topicOptical Coherence Tomography ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207