MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005819879 · doi:10.3390/s20041027

Rapid High-Resolution Mosaic Acquisition for Photoacoustic Remote Sensing

2020· article· en· W3005819879 on OpenAlexafffund
Saad Abbasi, Kevan Bell, Parsin Haji Reza

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCentre for Bioengineering and Biotechnology, University of WaterlooCanada Foundation for InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsillumiSonics
KeywordsRaster scanOpticsField of viewResolution (logic)Image resolutionMaterials scienceFrame ratePhotoacoustic imaging in biomedicineComputer scienceComputer visionBiomedical engineeringArtificial intelligencePhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mechanical stages are routinely used to scan large expanses of biological specimens in photoacoustic imaging. This is primarily due to the limited field of view (FOV) provided by optical scanning. However, stage scanning becomes impractical at higher scanning speeds, or potentially unfeasible with heavier samples. Also, the slow scan-rate of the stages makes high resolution scanning a time-consuming process. Some clinical applications such as microsurgery require submicron resolution in a reflection-mode configuration necessitating a method that can acquire large field of views with a small raster scanning step size. In this study, we describe a method that combines mechanical stages with optical scanning for the rapid acquisition of high-resolution large FOVs. Optical scanning is used to acquire small frames in a two-dimensional grid formed by the mechanical stages. These frames are captured with specific overlap for effective image registration. Using a step size of 200 nm, we demonstrate mosaics of carbon fiber networks with FOVs of 0.8 × 0.8 mm2 captured in under 70 s with 1.2 µm image resolution. Larger mosaics yielding an imaging area of 3 × 3 mm2 are also shown. The method is validated by imaging a 1 × 1 mm2 section of unstained histopathological human tissue.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207