ArticleScientific reports2025
Computational self-corrected quantitative 3D topographic imaging.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
Abstract
Three-dimensional microscopy has become an essential tool for inspecting samples across a broad range of fields, from scientific research to industrial applications. In many cases, precise geometric measurements on 3D shapes and structures at the micro scale are vital. For this, established techniques typically rely on axial scanning to sample the measured volume. However, an imperfect motion of the scanner inevitably introduces errors in the output measurements. We present a method to estimate and suppress the scanner positioning errors through computational analysis of the acquired data, leading to improved measurement precision. While methods for correction of such errors are available and well known for interferometric systems thanks to fringe analysis, this has remained an unsolved challenge for non-interferometric technologies such as confocal microscopy. We experimentally demonstrate the method and report a ten-fold improvement in the axial precision of confocal microscopy systems equipped with motorised scanners. The results are comparable to or even surpass those achieved with high-quality piezoelectric scanners, while preserving the large measurement ranges offered by motorised linear stages. Furthermore, this method offers a cost-effective alternative to high-quality scanners by leveraging low-cost computation in place of expensive hardware, and it can be seamlessly integrated into existing systems with minimal modification.
Indexed as
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.