MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408692257 · doi:10.1117/12.3042165

Computational defocus correction in spatial frequency domain imaging

2025· article· en· W4408692257 on OpenAlexaff
Jie Jiao, Lindsay Kuramoto, Ofer Levi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicImage Processing Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrequency domainComputer scienceSpatial frequencyDomain (mathematical analysis)Computer visionOpticsPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In spatial frequency domain imaging (SFDI), tissue optical properties are estimated by projecting spatial frequencies on the tissue and measuring back-scattered reflectance. We characterize the measurement error in camera-defocused SFDI and evaluate 1) dividing the defocus response and 2) cubic phase mask approaches in recovering SFDI performance. Cameradefocused SFDI underestimates tissue optical properties and loses spatial resolution. Both methods are shown to double the object distance range over which optical property measurements are within 25% of best focus values, though spatial resolution is lost. This work extends SFDI’s potential applications to remotely monitoring cardiovascular health in clinics and homes.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.895
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Processing Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207