ArticleACS omega2022
Noise versus Resolution in Optical Chemical Imaging-How Reliable Are Our Measurements?
Article in ACS omega, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Optical chemical imaging has established itself as a valuable technique for visualizing analyte distributions in 2D, notably in medical, biological, and environmental applications. In particular for image acquisitions on small scales between few millimeter to the micrometer range, as well as in heterogeneous samples with steep analyte gradients, image resolution is essential. When individual pixels are inspected, however, image noise becomes a metric as relevant as image accuracy and precision, and denoising filters are applied to preserve relevant information. While denoising filters smooth the image noise, they can also lead to a loss of spatial resolution and thus to a loss of relevant information about analyte distributions. To investigate the trade-off between image resolution and noise reduction for information preservation, we studied the impact of random camera noise and noise due to incorrect camera settings on oxygen optodes using the ratiometric imaging technique. First, we estimated the noise amplification across the calibration process using a Monte Carlo simulation for nonlinear fit models. We demonstrated how initially marginal random camera noise results in a significant standard deviation (SD) for oxygen concentration of up to 2.73% air under anoxic conditions, although the measurement was conducted under ideal conditions and over 270 thousand sample pixels were considered during calibration. Second, we studied the effect of the Gaussian denoising filter on a steep oxygen gradient and investigated the impact when the smoothing filter is applied during data processing. Finally, we demonstrated the effectiveness of a Savitzky-Golay filter compared to the well-established Gaussian filter.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.