A dual view catadioptric endoscope for fluorescence endoscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary form only given. Fluorescence endoscopy has been identified as a potential diagnostic tool for early cancer screening thanks to the difference between fluorescence emissions of the malignant and normal tissue. White light imaging based endoscopy is widely available on the market today, but only a handful has fluorescence imaging capabilities. Fluorescence endoscopy is a useful supplement to white light endoscopy since it could act as markers for automated screening of lengthy endoscopic video especially in the case of capsule endoscopy. The autofluorescence emission signals resulting from endogenous tissue such as collagen and NADH in the GI tract are very weak, while most endoscopes only image forward view with low fluorescence light collection efficiency. The goal of this work is to investigate the feasibility of a wide field approach using catadioptric optics for autofluorescence endoscopy. Catadioptric optics involves the use of reflective and refractive optical components, such as mirrors and lenses. Catadioptric wide field imaging may be able to provide wide coverage of the field of view, decent light collection, as well as possible digitally reconstructed low distortion images using unwrapping algorithms specific to mirror geometries. The catadioptric optical system would have custom optics that focuses two separate views onto the same imaging plane. The views would occupy separate regions on the imaging plane. The forward view is oriented along the endoscope's axis of symmetry, while the side view is a panorama oriented in the radial direction relative to the axis of symmetry. Each view is modeled in OSLO and custom lenses were designed to complement the mirrors. A 1:1 prototype includes one set of lens and mirror design that would fit inside a capsule endoscope of length 26mm and diameter 10 mm. The lens design solution is based on existing lens material and within current microoptics fabrication tolerances. The imaging plane is constrained to be within common CCD sensor sizes of 1/3" or smaller. The geometric RMS spot size is around 6 μm. The prototype has minor magnification modification so that the imaging area would fit on a common CCD sensor size such as 1/3".
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.005 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".