Machine learning for real-time optical property recovery in interstitial photodynamic therapy: a stimulation-based study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the continued development of non-toxic photosensitizer drugs, interstitial photodynamic therapy (iPDT) is showing more favorable outcomes in recent clinical trials. IPDT planning is crucial to further increase the treatment efficacy. However, it remains a major challenge to generate a high-quality, patient-specific plan due to uncertainty in tissue optical properties (OPs), µ a and µ s . These parameters govern how light propagates inside tissues, and any deviation from the planning-assumed values during treatment could significantly affect the treatment outcome. In this work, we increase the robustness of iPDT against OP variations by using machine learning models to recover the patient-specific OPs from light dosimetry measurements and then re-optimizing the diffusers’ optical powers to adapt to these OPs in real time. Simulations on virtual brain tumor models show that reoptimizing the power allocation with the recovered OPs significantly reduces uncertainty in the predicted light dosimetry for all tissues involved.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it