Robotic tissue scanning with biophotonic probe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Raman spectroscopy is an optical imaging technique used to characterize tissue via molecular analysis. The use of Raman spectroscopy for real-time intraoperative tissue classification requires fast analysis with minimal human intervention. In order to have accurate predictions and classifications, a large and reliable database of tissue classifications with spectra results is required. We have developed a system that can be used to generate an efficient scanning path for robotic scanning of tissues using Raman spectroscopy. METHODS: A camera mounted to a robotic controller is used to take an image of a tissue slide. The corners of the tissue slides within the sample image are identified, and the size of the slide is calculated. The image is cropped to fit the size of the slide and the image is manipulated to identify the tissue contour. A grid set to fit around the size of the tissue is calculated and a grid scanning pattern is generated. A masked image of the tissue contour is used to create a scanning pattern containing only the tissue. The tissue scanning pattern points are transformed to the robot controller coordinate system and used for robotic tissue scanning. The pattern is validated using spectroscopic scans of the tissue sample. The run time of the tissue scan pattern is compared to a region of interest scanning pattern encapsulating the tissue using the robotic controller. RESULTS: The average scanning time for the tissue scanning pattern compared to region of interest scanning reduced by 4 minutes and 58 seconds. CONCLUSION: This method reduced the number of points used for automated robotic scanning, and can be used to reduce scanning time and unusable data points to improve data collection efficiency.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".