MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414399609 · doi:10.1364/boe.572077

Deep reinforcement learning for automatic defocus correction using OCT image intensity

2025· article· en· W4414399609 on OpenAlexaff
Guozheng Xu, Thomas J. Smart, Arman Athwal, Robert J. Zawadzki, Peter R. T. Munro, Marinko V. Šarunic

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedical Optics Express · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicImage Processing Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNational Eye InstituteNational Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre at Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of OphthalmologyMoorfields Eye CharityEuropean Commission
KeywordsOptical coherence tomographyRetinalVisualizationFocus (optics)RetinaAccommodationProcess (computing)Image processingLight intensity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) image stability often suffers during in vivo imaging of the retina due to axial motion of the subject’s head and changes in their visual focus. Ocular accommodation can actively adjust the focus, affecting the axial intensity distribution across the retinal cross-section and the lateral resolution of the target layers. Axial motion shifts the retinal image and affects en face visualization of retinal layers. We present an automated procedure for stabilization of axial motion and focus during OCT retinal image acquisition using deep reinforcement learning (DRL) for defocus correction. The correction process requires only B-scan images as inputs, making it suitable for real-time correction. In silico training and in vivo fine-tuning experiments have been conducted and presented to validate the performance of the correction procedure for retinal imaging.

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 score0.763
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 venueBiomedical Optics ExpressSame topicImage Processing Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207