Adaptive optics in the mouse eye: wavefront sensing based vs image-guided aberration correction
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adaptive Optics (AO) is required to achieve diffraction limited resolution in many real-life imaging applications in biology and medicine. AO is essential to guarantee high fidelity visualization of cellular structures for retinal imaging by correcting ocular aberrations. Aberration correction for mouse retinal imaging by direct wavefront measurement has been demonstrated with great success. However, for mouse eyes, the performance of the wavefront sensor (WFS) based AO can be limited by several factors including non-common path errors, wavefront reconstruction errors, and an ill-defined reference plane. Image-based AO can avoid these issues at the cost of algorithmic execution time. Furthermore, image-based approaches can provide improvements to compactness, accessibility, and even the performance of AO systems. Here, we demonstrate the ability of image-based AO to provide comparable aberration correction and image resolution to the conventional Shack-Hartmann WFS-based AO approach. The residual wavefront error of the mouse eye was monitored during a wavefront sensorless optimization to allow comparison with classical AO. This also allowed us to improve the performance of our AO system for small animal retinal imaging.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it