MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2956043600 · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/ab1f33

Navigated non-contact fluorescence tomography

2019· article· en· W2956043600 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael J. Daly, Brian C. Wilson, Jonathan C. Irish, David A. Jaffray

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsOpticsDiffuse optical imagingImaging phantomCalibrationLaserMaterials scienceOptical tomographyPhysicsCamera lensLens (geology)Tomography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A non-contact approach for diffuse optical tomography (DOT) has been developed for on-demand image updates using surgical navigation technology. A stereoscopic optical tracker provides real-time localization of reflective spheres mounted to a laser diode and near-infrared camera. Standard camera calibration is combined with tracking data to determine the intrinsic camera parameters (focal length, principal point and non-linear lens distortion) and the tracker-to-camera transform. Tracker-to-laser calibration is performed using images of laser beam intersection with a tracked calibration surface. Source and detector positions for a finite-element DOT implementation are projected onto the boundary elements of the tissue mesh by finding ray-triangle intersections. A multi-stage model converts camera counts to surface flux by accounting for lens aperture settings, fluorescence filter transmittance, photodetector quantum efficiency, photon energy, exposure time, readout offset and camera gain. The image-guidance framework was applied to an in-house optical tomography system configured for indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence. Mean target registration errors for camera and laser calibration were less than 1 mm. Surface flux measurements of total reflectance and fluorescence in Intralipid-based fluorescence phantoms (0–2 μ g ml −1 ) had mean errors of 3.1% and 4.4%, respectively, relative to diffusion theory predictions. Spatially-resolved reflectance measurements in a calibrated optical phantom agreed with theory for radial distances up to 25 mm from the laser source. Inverse fluorescence reconstructions of a sub-surface fluorescence target confirmed the localization accuracy (average target centroid error of 0.44 mm). This translational research system is under investigation for clinical applications in head and neck surgery, including oral cavity tumor resection, lymph node mapping and free-flap perforator assessment.

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)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207