MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401619969 · doi:10.1364/boe.530569

Computational approach for correcting defocus and suppressing speckle noise in line-field optical coherence tomography images

2024· article· en· W4401619969 on OpenAlexafffund
Nima Abbasi, Keyu Chen, Alexander Wong, Kostadinka Bizheva

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Optics Express · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Coherence Tomography Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsOptical coherence tomographySpeckle noiseOpticsSpeckle patternCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Computer scienceImage processingSpeckle imagingNoise (video)TomographyPhysicsComputer visionImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The trade-off between transverse resolution and depth-of-focus (DOF) typical for optical coherence tomography (OCT) systems based on conventional optics, prevents “single-shot” acquisition of volumetric OCT images with sustained high transverse resolution over the entire imaging depth. Computational approaches for correcting defocus and higher order aberrations in OCT images developed in the past require highly stable phase data, which poses a significant technological challenge. Here, we present an alternative computational approach to sharpening OCT images and reducing speckle noise, based on intensity OCT data. The novel algorithm uses non-local priors to model correlated speckle noise within a maximum a posteriori framework to generate sharp and noise-free images. The performance of the algorithm was tested on images of plant tissue (cucumber) and in-vivo healthy human cornea, acquired with line-field spectral domain OCT (LF-SD-OCT) systems. The novel algorithm effectively suppressed speckle noise and sharpened or recovered morphological features in the OCT images for depths up to 13×DOF (depth-of-focus) relative to the focal plane.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.263
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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