MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408604129 · doi:10.1117/12.3047679

Advances in lensless imaging based on machine learning using ray tracing

2025· article· en· W4408604129 on OpenAlexaff
Samira Arabpou, Simon Thibault

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRandom lasers and scattering media
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRay tracing (physics)TracingArtificial intelligenceOpticsPhysicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sickle cell disease (SCD), an inherited red blood cell disorder characterized by the cell’s sickle shape, affects nearly 100 million people worldwide. Microscopy of red blood cells is crucial for disease detection. However, conventional methods often rely on bulky, expensive devices and require skilled human analysts to interpret Red Blood Cell (RBC) images. To address these challenges, we replaced the lens of the microscope with a phase modulator to capture the opto-biological signature(OBS) of blood samples. Our approach bypasses the need for image reconstruction, enabling direct classification using Machine Learning (ML) algorithms based on statistical features extracted from OBS data. In this project, we focus on optimizing the experimental setup using ray tracing software simulations to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of our classification system, rather than optimizing the ML algorithm itself. In this paper, we have shown how optical design can effectively help enhance the performance of lensless imaging systems. We utilized Zemax OpticStudio for ray tracing simulations to model the lensless microscope and subsequently replicated these simulations using Fourier optics in MATLAB. The advantages of using ray tracing software like Zemax include its specialized environment for optical simulations and the efficiency in handling optical components. Additionally, Zemax provides a well-established framework for ensuring accuracy, whereas MATLAB simulations may vary based on the quality of the code and algorithms used. In conclusion, depending on the specific application of the lensless microscope, parameters such as the distances between elements and the type of modulator can be effectively optimized using a ray tracing software like Zemax.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.597
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRandom lasers and scattering mediaFrench-language works237,207