Effect of a contact lens on mouse retinal in vivo imaging: Effective focal length changes and monochromatic aberrations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For in vivo mouse retinal imaging, especially with Adaptive Optics instruments, application of a contact lens is desirable, as it allows maintenance of cornea hydration and helps to prevent cataract formation during lengthy imaging sessions. However, since the refractive elements of the eye (cornea and lens) serve as the objective for most in vivo retinal imaging systems, the use of a contact lens, even with 0 Dpt. refractive power, can alter the system's optical properties. In this investigation we examined the effective focal length change and the aberrations that arise from use of a contact lens. First, focal length changes were simulated with a Zemax mouse eye model. Then ocular aberrations with and without a 0 Dpt. contact lens were measured with a Shack-Hartmann wavefront sensor (SHWS) in a customized AO-SLO system. Total RMS wavefront errors were measured for two groups of mice (14-month, and 2.5-month-old), decomposed into 66 Zernike aberration terms, and compared. These data revealed that vertical coma and spherical aberrations were increased with use of a contact lens in our system. Based on the ocular wavefront data we evaluated the effect of the contact lens on the imaging system performance as a function of the pupil size. Both RMS error and Strehl ratios were quantified for the two groups of mice, with and without contact lenses, and for different input beam sizes. These results provide information for determining optimum pupil size for retinal imaging without adaptive optics, and raise critical issues for design of mouse optical imaging systems that incorporate contact lenses.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".