MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996770512 · doi:10.1038/s42005-019-0267-9

Acousto optic imaging beyond the acoustic diffraction limit using speckle decorrelation

2020· article· en· W2996770512 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Daniel Doktofsky, Moriya Rosenfeld, Ori Katz

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Physics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAzrieli Foundation
KeywordsDecorrelationSpeckle patternOpticsWavefrontPhysicsImage resolutionDiffractionComputer scienceComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Acousto-optic imaging (AOI) enables optical-contrast imaging deep inside scattering samples via localized ultrasound modulation of scattered light. However, the resolution in AOI is inherently limited by the ultrasound focus size, prohibiting microscopic investigations. In recent years advances in the field of digital wavefront-shaping allowed the development of novel approaches for overcoming AOI’s acoustic resolution limit. However, these approaches require thousands of wavefront measurements within the sample speckle decorrelation time, limiting their application to static samples. Here, we show that it is possible to surpass the acoustic resolution-limit with a conventional AOI system by exploiting the natural dynamics of speckle decorrelations rather than trying to overcome them. We achieve this by adapting the principles of super-resolution optical fluctuations imaging (SOFI) to AOI. We show that naturally fluctuating optical speckle grains can serve in AOI as the analogues of blinking fluorophores in SOFI, enabling super-resolution by statistical analysis of fluctuating acousto-optic signals.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications PhysicsSame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207