Distortion correction and cross-talk compensation algorithm for use with an imaging spectrometer based spatially resolved diffuse reflectance system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optical spectroscopy of human tissue has been widely applied within the field of biomedical optics to allow rapid, in vivo characterization and analysis of the tissue. When designing an instrument of this type, an imaging spectrometer is often employed to allow for simultaneous analysis of distinct signals. This is especially important when performing spatially resolved diffuse reflectance spectroscopy. In this article, an algorithm is presented that allows for the automated processing of 2-dimensional images acquired from an imaging spectrometer. The algorithm automatically defines distinct spectrometer tracks and adaptively compensates for distortion introduced by optical components in the imaging chain. Crosstalk resulting from the overlap of adjacent spectrometer tracks in the image is detected and subtracted from each signal. The algorithm's performance is demonstrated in the processing of spatially resolved diffuse reflectance spectra recovered from an Intralipid and ink liquid phantom and is shown to increase the range of wavelengths over which usable data can be recovered.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".