MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211008077 · doi:10.1364/boe.447394

Convolutional dictionary learning for blind deconvolution of optical coherence tomography images

2022· article· en· W4211008077 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Optics Express · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Coherence Tomography Applications
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersLos Alamos National LaboratoryNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsDeconvolutionOptical coherence tomographyPoint spread functionSpeckle patternSpeckle noiseWeightingBrightnessBlind deconvolutionNoise (video)Pattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we demonstrate a sparsity-regularized, complex, blind deconvolution method for removing sidelobe artefacts and stochastic noise from optical coherence tomography (OCT) images. Our method estimates the complex scattering amplitude of tissue on a line-by-line basis by estimating and deconvolving the complex, one-dimensional axial point spread function (PSF) from measured OCT A-line data. We also present a strategy for employing a sparsity weighting mask to mitigate the loss of speckle brightness within tissue-containing regions caused by the sparse deconvolution. Qualitative and quantitative analyses show that this approach suppresses sidelobe artefacts and background noise better than traditional spectral reshaping techniques, with negligible loss of tissue structure. The technique is particularly useful for emerging OCT applications where OCT images contain strong specular reflections at air-tissue boundaries that create large sidelobe artefacts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedical Optics ExpressSame topicOptical Coherence Tomography ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207