3D microscopic reconstruction of pearls using combined optical microscopy and photogrammetry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we introduce an affordable and accessible method that combines optical microscopy and photogrammetry to reconstruct 3D models of Tahitian pearls. We present a novel device designed for acquiring microscopic images around a sphere using translational displacement stages and outline our method for reconstructing these images. We successfully created 3D models of two individual pearl rings, each representing 6.3% of the pearl's surface. Additionally, we generated a combined model representing 10.3% of the pearl's surface. This showcases the potential for reconstructing entire pearls with appropriate instrumentation. We emphasize that our approach extends beyond pearls and spherical objects and can be adapted for various object types using appropriate acquisition devices. We provide a proof of concept demonstrating the feasibility of 3D photogrammetry using optical microscopy. Consequently, our method offers a practical and cost-effective alternative for generating 3D models at a microscopic scale, particularly when detailed internal structure information is unnecessary.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".