On the use of polychromatic cameras for high spatial resolution spectral dose measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective. Despite the demonstrated benefits of hyperspectral formalism for stem effect corrections in the context of fiber dose measurements, this approach has not been yet translated into volumetric measurements where cameras are typically used for their distinguishing spatial resolution. This work investigates demosaicing algorithms for polychromatic cameras based spectral imaging. Approach. The scintillation and Cherenkov signals produced in a radioluminescent phantom are imaged by a polychromatic camera and isolated using the spectral formalism. To do so, five demosaicing algorithms are investigated from calibration to measurements: a clustering method and four interpolation algorithms. The resulting accuracy of scintillation and Cherenkov images is evaluated with measurements of the differences (mean ± standard deviation) between the obtained and expected signals from profiles drawn across a scintillation spot. Signal-to-noise ratio and signal-to-background ratio are further measured and compared in the resulting scintillation images. Finally, the resulting differences on the scintillation signal from a 0.2 × 0.2 cm 2 region-of-interest (ROI) were reported. Main results. Clustering, OpenCV, bilinear, Malvar and Menon demosaicing algorithms respectively yielded differences of 3 ± 5%, 1 ± 3%, 1 ± 3%, 1 ± 2% and 2 ± 4% in the resulting scintillation images. For the Cherenkov images, all algorithms provided differences below 1%. All methods enabled measurements over the detectability (SBR > 2) and sensitivity (SNR > 5) thresholds with the bilinear algorithm providing the best SNR value. Clustering, OpenCV, bilinear, Malvar and Menon demosaicing algorithms respectively provided differences on the ROI analysis of 7 ± 5%, 3 ± 2%, 3 ± 2%, 4 ± 2%, 7 ± 3%. Significance. Radioluminescent signals can accurately be isolated using a single polychromatic camera. Moreover, demosaicing using a bilinear kernel provided the best results and enabled Cherenkov signal subtraction while preserving the full spatial resolution of the camera.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".