MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3170410645 · doi:10.1364/oe.426080

Pupil-aberration calibration with controlled illumination for quantitative phase imaging

2021· article· en· W3170410645 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Express · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDigital Holography and Microscopy
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersInstitute for Information and Communications Technology PromotionNational Research Foundation of Korea
KeywordsOpticsPhase imagingPupilCalibrationMaterials sciencePhase (matter)RefractometryResolution (logic)Sample (material)Refractive indexMicroscopyComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantitative phase imaging (QPI) exploits sample-induced changes in the optical field to analyze biological specimens in a label-free manner. However, the quantitative nature of QPI makes it susceptible to optical aberrations. We propose a method for calibrating pupil aberrations by imaging a sample of interest. The proposed method recovers pupil information by utilizing the cross-spectral density between optical fields at different incident angles and allows both thin and weakly scattering three-dimensional samples for calibration. We experimentally validate the proposed method by imaging various samples, including a resolution target, breast tissue, and a polystyrene bead, and demonstrate aberration-free two- and three-dimensional QPI.

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.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.801
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.277 · 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