Gabor optical coherence tomographic angiography (GOCTA) (Part II): theoretical basis of sensitivity improvement and optimization for processing speed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We previously proposed a Gabor optical coherence tomography angiography (GOCTA) algorithm for spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SDOCT) to extract microvascular signals from spectral fringes directly, with speed improvement of 4 to 20 times over existing methods. In this manuscript, we explored the theoretical basis of GOCTA with comparison of experimental data using solid and liquid displacement sample targets, demonstrating that the majority of the GOCTA sensitivity advantage over speckle variance based techniques was in the small displacement range (< 10 ∼ 20 µm) of the moving target (such as red blood cells). We further normalized GOCTA signal by root-mean-square (RMS) of original fringes, achieving a more uniform image quality, especially at edges of blood vessels where slow flow could occur. Furthermore, by transecting the spectral fringes and using skipped convolution, the data processing speed could be further improved. We quantified the trade-off in signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise-ratio (CNR) under various sub-spectral bands and found an optimized condition using 1/4 spectral band for minimal angiography image quality degradation, yet achieving a further 26.7 and 34 times speed improvement on GPU and CPU, respectively. Our optimized GOCTA algorithm has a speed advantage of over 140 times compared to existing speckle variance OCT (SVOCT) method.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".