MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044946220 · doi:10.1364/ol.397614

Label-free lipid contrast imaging using non-contact near-infrared photoacoustic remote sensing microscopy

2020· article· en· W3044946220 on OpenAlexafffund
Pradyumna Kedarisetti, Nathaniel J. M. Haven, Brendon S. Restall, Matthew T. Martell, Roger J. Zemp

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMaterials scienceOpticsMicroscopyAbsorption (acoustics)Raman scatteringNear-infrared spectroscopyMicroscopeRaman spectroscopyOptoelectronicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Histopathology of lipid-rich tissues is often a difficult endeavor, owing to the limited tissue processing workflows that can appropriately preserve tissue while keeping fatty deposits intact. Here, we present the first usage of near-infrared (NIR) photoacoustic remote sensing (PARS) to achieve imaging contrast from lipids without the need for exogenous stains or labels. In our system, the facile production of 1225 nm excitation pulses is achieved by the stimulated Raman scattering of a 1064 nm source propagating through an optical fiber. PARS-based detection is achieved by monitoring the change in the scattering profile of a co-aligned 1550 nm continuous-wave interrogation beam in response to absorption of the 1225 nm light by lipids. Our non-contact, reflection-mode approach can achieve a FWHM resolution of up to 0.96 µm and signal-to-noise ratios as high as 45 dB from carbon fibers and 9.7 dB from a lipid phantom. NIR-PARS offers a promising approach to image lipid-rich samples with a simplified workflow.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations27
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics LettersSame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207