Diffuse photon-remission associated with single-fiber geometry may be a simple scaling of that collected over the same area when under centered-illumination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Robust models for single-fiber reflectance (SFR) are relatively complex [ Opt. Lett. 45 , 2078 ( 2020 ) OPLEDP 0146-9592 10.1364/OL.385845 ] due to overlapping of the illumination and collection areas that entails probability weighting of the spatial integration of photon-remission. We demonstrate, via analytical means for limiting cases and Monte Carlo simulation of broader conditions, that diffuse photon-remission collected by single-fiber geometry may be scaled over the center-illuminated photon-remission. We specify for a medium revealing Henyey–Greenstein (HG) scattering anisotropy that the diffuse photon-remission from a sub-diffusive area of a top-hat illumination is ∼ 84.9 % of that collected over the same area when under a centered-illumination. This ratio remains consistent over a reduced-scattering fiber-size product of μ s ′ d fib = [ 10 − 5 , 10 0 ] , for absorption varying 3 orders of magnitude. When applied to hemoglobin oxygenation changes induced in an aqueous phantom using a 200 µm single-fiber probe, the center-illumination-scaled model of SFR produced fitting results agreeing with reference measurements.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".