1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Numerical study of reflectance imaging using a parallel Monte Carlo method
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1118/1.2745241
/content/aapm/journal/medphys/34/7/10.1118/1.2745241
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/34/7/10.1118/1.2745241

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

The configuration of the incident light beam, turbid phantom, and optical system for acquisition of spatially resolved images. For semi-infinite heterogeneous phantoms (in simulations, ) while for homogeneous slab phantoms .

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

The bidirectional reflection and transmission functions vs the exit angle for a homogeneous slab phantom of with . Two groups of phantom parameters were used (1) (, ), , ; (2) (, ); ; . The black (red) lines are the bidirectional reflection (transmission) functions calculated by the Monte Carlo method while the black (red) symbols are the corresponding values from Table 35 in Ref. 4.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Three gray-scale reflectance images of a semi-infinite heterogeneous phantom with a grid over an FOV of along and axes and , , , , and different values of and collection angle : (a) , ; (b) , ; (c) , . Other parameters are , , , , .

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

(a) The dependence of with at different NA values as marked; the results obtained with the center of the embedded region are represented by the solid lines and the result obtained with is represented with a dashed line; (b) image contrast vs the numerical aperture for different as marked with the lines as visual guides. The result obtained with are represented by symbols of ◻◇엯 and the results obtained with are represented by . All other parameters are identical to those in Fig. 3.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

The contrast vs the albedo of the central region with for different albedo of the peripheral region: (a) and ; (b) and . The scattering coefficient of the central region is marked in the figures with arrows indicating the values. The solid lines are visual guides and all other parameters are identical to those in Fig. 3.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

(a) The contrast vs the thickness of the central region for four sets of and as marked in the legends, respectively, with , , , , . The lines are visual guides and all other parameters are identical to those in Fig. 3(b). The dependence of at different incident angles with , , . Other parameters are identical to those in (a).

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

The contrast vs (a) the anisotropy factor of the central region with and ; (b) the refractive index with and for four sets of and as marked in the legends, respectively. The optical parameters of the peripheral region are given by , . The lines are visual guides and all other parameters are identical to those in Fig. 3.

Tables

Generic image for table
TABLE I.

The optical parameter values for heterogeneous phantoms.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aapm/journal/medphys/34/7/10.1118/1.2745241
2007-06-22
2014-04-18
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Numerical study of reflectance imaging using a parallel Monte Carlo method
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/34/7/10.1118/1.2745241
10.1118/1.2745241
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM