Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 40 references

Snapshot multi-spectral imaging through defocusing and a Fourier imager network

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A single defocused grayscale image carries enough chromatic blur to recover six spectral bands, and a Fourier-domain network decodes them in one snapshot.

desk verdict A clean proof of concept for classifying which of six LEDs lit a DMD-projected binary pattern, but the experiments never test recovery of independent spectral content, so the central multi-spectral claim is not yet supported. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.14287 v1 pith:DPQY57AB submitted 2025-01-24 physics.optics cs.CVcs.LGphysics.app-ph

Xilin Yang , Michael John Fanous , Hanlong Chen , Ryan Lee , Paloma Casteleiro Costa , Yuhang Li , Luzhe Huang , Yijie Zhang
show 1 more author
Aydogan Ozcan
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.opticscs.CVcs.LGphysics.app-ph
keywords snapshotmultispectralimagingchromaticaberrationdefocusencodingmonochromeimagesensorFourierimagernetworkdeeplearningreconstructionLEDilluminationcomputational
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that a standard monochrome camera with ordinary optics can act as a snapshot multispectral imager: the lens's natural chromatic aberration makes each wavelength focus at a different depth, so a single defocused grayscale image contains a wavelength-specific blur mixture that a neural network can untangle. The authors report 92.98% accuracy in identifying which of six illumination channels were present in blind tests, with reconstructed channels reaching SSIM 0.63±0.09 and PSNR 12.00±1.82 dB. If this holds, multispectral imaging would no longer require filters, prisms, metasurfaces, or other custom wavelength-selective hardware, which would make snapshot spectral capture far cheaper and more accessible for biomedicine, agriculture, and industrial inspection. The paper frames the result as a physical encoder (defocus) paired with a learned digital decoder (the multi-spectral Fourier Imager Network, mFIN).

What carries the argument

The physical encoder is wavelength-dependent defocus: blue light focuses closer to the lens than red light, so each illumination band produces its own blur kernel, and the monochrome sensor records a mixture of these channel-specific blurred patterns. The digital decoder is the multi-spectral Fourier Imager Network (mFIN), whose building block is a Dynamic Spatial Fourier Transform (dSPAF) module: the input image is transformed with a 2D FFT, multiplied by spatial-frequency weights generated by a shallow U-Net, inverse-transformed back to the spatial domain, and passed through a PReLU activation. Dense connections feed each module's output to all later modules, and a residual connection with channel repetition maps the single grayscale input to a six-channel output. Training minimizes a weighted sum of spatial mean absolute error and Fourier-domain mean absolute error with weights 1 and 0.015, which together force the network to match both the image structure and its frequency content.

What would settle it

Set up the identical optics, but instead of DMD-projected binary tissue masks, display continuous-tone natural-scene images or a printed resolution target with smooth gradients under the same six-LED illumination combinations, then run the network trained only on the binary tissue set. If per-channel accuracy on these scenes falls to chance or reconstructed SSIM collapses below the reported range, the demonstrated performance is tied to the binary pattern distribution rather than to general defocus-based spectral decoding.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that chromatic aberration is not just an optical defect but a sufficient physical encoding mechanism for multispectral information. In the authors' experimental system, six LEDs illuminate a binary pattern projected by a digital micromirror device; because each wavelength focuses at a different plane, the monochrome sensor records a superposition of channel-specific blurred images. A trained network called mFIN, built from Dynamic Spatial Fourier Transform (dSPAF) modules with dense connections and a Fourier-domain loss, decodes this single exposure into six separate spectral channels. On 76 blind-test objects from six unseen patterns, the model achieved 92.98% per-channel illumination accuracy, and for true-positive channels the reconstructed images averaged SSIM 0.63±0.09, PSNR 12.00±1.82 dB, RMSE 0.26±0.06, and NMSE 0.068±0.026. The paper also shows that performance degrades gradually as more LEDs are turned on simultaneously, and that reconstruction quality varies systematically by wavelength, with 460 nm and 623 nm performing better than 397 nm and 590 nm.

Load-bearing premise

The network must generalize from the binarized, DMD-projected lung-tissue patterns it trained on to the continuous-tone, arbitrary scenes that the stated applications require; all blind tests stay inside that same binary tissue distribution.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A monochrome camera with ordinary lenses can serve as a snapshot multispectral imager for six visible bands, eliminating the need for filter wheels, spectral filter arrays, prisms, or metasurfaces.
  • Because decoding is a single feed-forward network pass after training, multispectral information could be extracted at video rates limited only by exposure and readout.
  • Multiplexed illumination is usable: even with five concurrent LEDs, most energy differences remain within ±0.2, so simultaneous multi-wavelength capture does not break the reconstruction.
  • Wavelength-dependent performance is systematic, so future setups can choose LED bands and lens parameters to land in the better-performing regions near 460 nm and 623 nm.
  • The encoder-decoder split means the same defocus-encoding idea could be transferred to other ordinary imaging systems without hardware changes beyond adding a training step.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A decisive out-of-distribution test would be training only on binary tissue patterns and then imaging continuous-tone natural scenes; the current metrics do not establish that transfer, and such a test would separate genuine spectral decoding from content memorization.
  • Because the encoder is just ordinary chromatic aberration, the same mFIN approach should work with any lens exhibiting longitudinal chromatic aberration; replacing the LED ring with a broadly tunable source could extend the method toward hyperspectral recovery, subject to information limits.
  • The Fourier-domain loss plus dynamic spectral filtering suggests a general recipe for other blur-based encoders, such as depth-dependent or aberration-engineered point-spread functions, potentially enabling joint depth-spectral reconstruction from a single grayscale frame.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript proposes a snapshot multi-spectral imaging system that uses chromatic defocus from six LED illumination bands as a physical encoder and a neural network (mFIN) to recover six spectral channel images from a single monochrome defocused image. The authors report 92.98% illumination-channel accuracy and average SSIM of 0.63 ± 0.09 on a held-out set of 76 multi-spectral objects. The physical idea is attractive and the experimental implementation is real, but the validation as designed does not exercise independent per-wavelength spatial content: the DMD projects the same binary pattern for every active LED, so the ground-truth channels are identical binary masks (or blank), and the reported metrics primarily measure illumination-state classification plus shared-mask reconstruction. The empirically chosen classification thresholds and the small, within-distribution test set further limit the strength of the claims.

Significance. If validated on spectrally diverse objects, this approach would offer a low-cost and simple snapshot multi-spectral imaging alternative. The paper provides a clear description of the optical setup, a legitimate held-out split, a complete network architecture, and quantitative metrics; these are genuine strengths. However, the central claim—that a single defocused grayscale image carries enough information to recover independent spectral channels—is not demonstrated by the current experiments. As it stands, the evidence supports a weaker claim about binary illumination detection and shared-pattern reconstruction. Additional experiments with objects whose spectral channels differ spatially, plus baselines and a threshold-sensitivity analysis, are needed before the paper's conclusions can be accepted.

major comments (4)
  1. [Results (data acquisition) and Methods (experimental setup)] The experimental data do not contain independent spectral image content. In the setup, the DMD projects one binary image pattern and all six LED bands illuminate that same pattern, so the ground truth for every active channel is identical and every inactive channel is zero. Consequently, the 92.98% channel accuracy in Figure 4a is essentially a classification of which LEDs are on, and the SSIM/PSNR metrics in Figures 5 and 6 quantify reconstruction of one common binary mask, not the disentangling of six independent spectral images. This is a load-bearing limitation: the central claim of multi-spectral image recovery requires test objects in which different wavelength bands carry different spatial information. The authors should add such objects, for example a color-calibration target with known per-band spatial reflectances or DMD patterns that differ per LED.
  2. [Methods (energy-difference thresholds)] The reported 92.98% accuracy depends on empirically tuned thresholds: the false-negative threshold of 0.2 and the false-positive threshold of 0.1 in the energy-difference measure are said to be "chosen empirically to balance the trade-off between prediction accuracy and overall image quality." The asymmetry of the thresholds and their post hoc selection make the headline accuracy conditional rather than intrinsic. The authors should report the full threshold dependence (e.g., ROC/AUC), or justify the thresholds on a validation set and show that the qualitative conclusions are robust to reasonable threshold variation.
  3. [Results (blind testing) and Methods (dataset)] The held-out evaluation is very small and within-distribution: 76 test objects are derived from only 6 binarized lung-tissue patterns, all from the same tissue type and after Otsu binarization. This supports claims about generalization to similar binary masks but not the stated applications to natural, continuous-tone scenes. Moreover, because each test object yields six channels that share one mask, the 456 data points in the confusion matrix are not statistically independent. The authors should test on a larger and more diverse set of objects, ideally including continuous-tone and natural images.
  4. [Results and Discussion (baselines)] No comparison with existing snapshot multispectral methods or with simpler baselines is provided. Without a baseline, it is unclear what the mFIN architecture contributes beyond, say, detecting LED states from defocus-blur statistics and then estimating a single mask. At minimum, the authors should compare against a standard U-Net or another non-Fourier network with comparable capacity, and ideally against a published snapshot multispectral system.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Methods (performance metrics)] The equations for sensitivity and specificity contain garbled symbols; they should read sensitivity = TP/(TP+FN) and specificity = TN/(TN+FP).
  2. [Methods (typesetting)] Several mathematical expressions appear with corrupted characters (e.g., the energy-difference and loss definitions); please ensure proper mathematical typesetting and consistent notation.
  3. [Methods (LED labels) and Results] The LED wavelength bands are described as ranges in Methods (e.g., 620–625 nm) but as single values in Results (e.g., 623 nm); state the center wavelengths used for labeling consistently.
  4. [Figure 3 caption] The caption says each column displays the predicted image alongside the corresponding target, but the main text refers to a "left column"; please clarify the figure layout.
  5. [Methods (PSNR definition)] The PSNR definition implicitly assumes a maximum pixel value of 1; state this normalization explicitly for readers.

Circularity Check

3 steps flagged · score 7.0 of 10

The reported 92.98% illumination-channel accuracy is an artifact of defining blank channels' normalizer as the binary pattern, so outputting the pattern in an off channel is scored correct.

  1. self definitional [Methods, energy difference definition and threshold classification]
    "Note that we calculated I_target using the binary image pattern (Y) irrespective of whether the channel was illuminated (positive ground truth) or blank (negative ground truth). This approach ensures that I_diff can always be normalized without division by zero, even if the channel's ground truth appears blank (i.e., the corresponding LED is not turned on). ... Similarly, for a sample where the ground truth is blank, any output with I_diff ≥ 0.1 is considered a false positive or leakage."

    For a blank/off channel, I_target is not zero but the full binary-pattern intensity. Hence a network that outputs the shared pattern in a channel whose LED is off has I_pred = I_target, giving I_diff = 0. Because the false-positive condition is I_diff ≥ 0.1, this output is not counted as a leakage; it is scored as a correct true negative. The 92.98% 'illumination channel' accuracy therefore does not measure whether off-channels are blank. The metric is equivalent to comparing every channel to the same pattern, so the headline prediction reduces to the input pattern by construction.

  2. self definitional [Results, 'Multi-spectral imaging with image defocus-based physical encoding'; Methods, data acquisition]
    "The DMD projects the spatial information of the image, referred to as the image pattern, thereby forming the final multi-spectral image. ... The training involved optimizing the mFIN network by minimizing the discrepancies between the ground truth image patterns (projected by the DMD) with channels illuminated by their corresponding LEDs that were turned on and the multi-spectral images reconstructed by the mFIN network."

    In this experimental design, every active spectral channel's ground truth is the same DMD binary mask, and every inactive channel is zero. Thus the six-channel target contains only one spatial pattern repeated across the 'on' channels, plus blank entries. The network can succeed by (1) classifying which LEDs are on from wavelength-dependent blur and (2) reconstructing the single shared mask. The reported SSIM/PSNR metrics therefore evaluate the shared mask, not the recovery of six independent spectral images. The central claim that a defocused monochrome frame encodes six independent spectral channels is not exercised; the reconstruction is tied to one pattern by construction.

1 more flagged steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Methods, threshold selection paragraph]
    "These thresholds have been chosen empirically to balance the trade-off between the prediction accuracy and the overall image quality."

    The headline 92.98% accuracy is produced by applying empirically chosen thresholds to the energy difference. The paper does not report selecting these thresholds on a separate validation set or fixing them before blind testing, so the reported accuracy is partly a fitted quantity rather than a parameter-free prediction of the network. The thresholds directly define which outputs count as correct, so the 'prediction' is partially determined by the evaluation procedure.

full rationale

The paper's core spectral-accuracy claim is compromised by a definitional choice in the evaluation metric. The Methods explicitly define I_target for blank channels as the sum of the binary pattern, not as zero, and then define a false positive only when I_diff ≥ 0.1. Consequently, a network that outputs the shared DMD pattern in an off channel receives I_diff = 0 and is scored as a correct true negative. The reported 92.98% channel accuracy therefore does not require the network to blank out inactive channels; it reduces to comparing each channel to the same input pattern. This is a concrete, quotable reduction of the headline prediction to its own input. The experimental design reinforces the limitation: all active spectral channels share one binary DMD pattern, so the multichannel ground truth contains only one spatial structure, and the SSIM/PSNR metrics evaluate reconstruction of that shared mask rather than independent spectral content. The empirically tuned thresholds add a secondary fitted-input concern. There is no load-bearing self-citation or imported uniqueness theorem; the network architecture and training are self-contained and the true-positive image-quality metrics are not circular. However, because the central spectral accuracy number is invalidated by construction, a score of 7 is appropriate.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the trained network weights, the empirical classification thresholds, and domain assumptions about the representativeness of the experimental setup. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Classification thresholds = 0.2 for false negatives, 0.1 for false positives
    Empirically chosen in Methods to balance accuracy and quality; the reported 92.98% accuracy depends on these values.
  • Loss weights = 1 (MAE), 0.015 (FDMAE)
    Empirically set in Methods; affect training but not the final evaluation directly.
  • mFIN network weights = Trained on 888 images from 114 patterns
    The learned mapping from defocused monochrome input to six spectral channels is the central component of the system.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Wavelength-dependent focal plane shifts create distinct blur for each LED band.
    The physical encoding mechanism is assumed to be sufficient; it is not quantitatively measured or modeled from first principles.
  • domain assumption The DMD-projected binary patterns and controlled LED illumination are representative of real-world multi-spectral scenes.
    Generalization to applications like biomedicine and agriculture relies on this, but only binary tissue patterns are tested.
  • ad hoc to paper The empirically chosen classification thresholds are meaningful for evaluating channel presence.
    The thresholds are defined in Methods with no independent justification.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Snapshot multi-spectral imaging through defocusing and a Fourier imager network." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DPQY57AB

@misc{pith2026250114287,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Snapshot multi-spectral imaging through defocusing and a Fourier imager network},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DPQY57AB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.14287}
}
read the original abstract

Multi-spectral imaging, which simultaneously captures the spatial and spectral information of a scene, is widely used across diverse fields, including remote sensing, biomedical imaging, and agricultural monitoring. Here, we introduce a snapshot multi-spectral imaging approach employing a standard monochrome image sensor with no additional spectral filters or customized components. Our system leverages the inherent chromatic aberration of wavelength-dependent defocusing as a natural source of physical encoding of multi-spectral information; this encoded image information is rapidly decoded via a deep learning-based multi-spectral Fourier Imager Network (mFIN). We experimentally tested our method with six illumination bands and demonstrated an overall accuracy of 92.98% for predicting the illumination channels at the input and achieved a robust multi-spectral image reconstruction on various test objects. This deep learning-powered framework achieves high-quality multi-spectral image reconstruction using snapshot image acquisition with a monochrome image sensor and could be useful for applications in biomedicine, industrial quality control, and agriculture, among others.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Shaw, G. A. & Burke, H. K. Spectral imaging for remote sensing. Linc. Lab. J. 14, 3–28 (2003)

    work page 2003

  2. [2]

    & Chanussot, J

    Thomas, C., Ranchin, T., Wald, L. & Chanussot, J. Synthesis of multi-spectral images to high spatial resolution: A critical review of fusion methods based on remote sensing physics. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 46, 1301–1312 (2008)

    work page 2008

  3. [3]

    & Borth, D

    Helber, P., Bischke, B., Dengel, A. & Borth, D. Eurosat: A novel dataset and deep learning benchmark for land use and land cover classification. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens. 12, 2217–2226 (2019)

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    Berry, S. et al. Analysis of multi-spectral imaging with the AstroPath platform informs efficacy of PD-1 blockade. Science 372, eaba2609 (2021)

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    & Fei, B

    Lu, G. & Fei, B. Medical hyperspectral imaging: a review. J. Biomed. Opt. 19, 010901– 010901 (2014)

    work page 2014

  6. [6]

    Levenson, R. M. & Mansfield, J. R. Multi-spectral imaging in biology and medicine: Slices of life. Cytometry A 69A, 748–758 (2006)

    work page 2006

  7. [7]

    Li, Q. et al. Review of spectral imaging technology in biomedical engineering: achievements and challenges. J. Biomed. Opt. 18, 100901–100901 (2013)

    work page 2013

  8. [8]

    & Sun, D.-W

    Feng, Y.-Z. & Sun, D.-W. Application of Hyperspectral Imaging in Food Safety Inspection and Control: A Review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 52, 1039–1058 (2012)

    work page 2012

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    & Schettini, R

    Buzzelli, M., Ciocca, G., Napoletano, P. & Schettini, R. Analyzing and Recognizing Food in Constrained and Unconstrained Environments. in Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on AIxFood 1–5 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2021). doi:10.1145/3475725.3483624. 19

    2021

  2. [10]

    Boegh, E. et al. Airborne multi-spectral data for quantifying leaf area index, nitrogen concentration, and photosynthetic efficiency in agriculture. Remote Sens. Environ. 81, 179– 193 (2002)

    2002

  3. [11]

    Deng, L. et al. UAV-based multi-spectral remote sensing for precision agriculture: A comparison between different cameras. ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 146, 124–136 (2018)

    2018

  4. [12]

    Adão, T. et al. Hyperspectral imaging: A review on UAV-based sensors, data processing and applications for agriculture and forestry. Remote Sens. 9, 1110 (2017)

    2017

  5. [13]

    & Bulcock, H

    Govender, M., Chetty, K. & Bulcock, H. A review of hyperspectral remote sensing and its application in vegetation and water resource studies. Water Sa 33, 145–151 (2007)

    2007

  6. [14]

    Advances in multi-spectral and hyperspectral imaging for archaeology and art conservation

    Liang, H. Advances in multi-spectral and hyperspectral imaging for archaeology and art conservation. Appl. Phys. A 106, 309–323 (2012)

    2012

  7. [15]

    & Aach, T

    Brauers, J., Schulte, N. & Aach, T. Multi-spectral filter-wheel cameras: Geometric distortion model and compensation algorithms. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 17, 2368–2380 (2008)

    2008

  8. [16]

    Imaging spectroscopy using tunable filters: a review

    Gat, N. Imaging spectroscopy using tunable filters: a review. Wavelet Appl. VII 4056, 50– 64 (2000)

    2000

  9. [17]

    Fowler, J. E. Compressive pushbroom and whiskbroom sensing for hyperspectral remote- sensing imaging. in 2014 IEEE international conference on image processing (ICIP) 684–688 (IEEE, 2014)

    2014

  10. [18]

    & Kudenov, M

    Hagen, N. & Kudenov, M. W. Review of snapshot spectral imaging technologies. Opt. Eng. 52, 090901–090901 (2013). 20

    2013

  11. [19]

    & Arce, G

    Arguello, H. & Arce, G. R. Colored coded aperture design by concentration of measure in compressive spectral imaging. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 23, 1896–1908 (2014)

    2014

  12. [20]

    Yako, M. et al. Video-rate hyperspectral camera based on a CMOS-compatible random array of Fabry–Pérot filters. Nat. Photonics 17, 218–223 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    & Haspeslagh, L

    Tack, N., Lambrechts, A., Soussan, P. & Haspeslagh, L. A compact, high-speed, and low-cost hyperspectral imager. in Silicon Photonics VII vol. 8266 126–138 (SPIE, 2012)

    2012

  14. [22]

    & Waller, L

    Monakhova, K., Yanny, K., Aggarwal, N. & Waller, L. Spectral DiffuserCam: lensless snapshot hyperspectral imaging with a spectral filter array. Optica 7, 1298–1307 (2020)

    2020

  15. [23]

    & Gouton, P

    Lapray, P.-J., Wang, X., Thomas, J.-B. & Gouton, P. Multi-spectral filter arrays: Recent advances and practical implementation. Sensors 14, 21626–21659 (2014)

    2014

  16. [24]

    Lin, C.-H., Huang, S.-H., Lin, T.-H. & Wu, P. C. Metasurface-empowered snapshot hyperspectral imaging with convex/deep (CODE) small-data learning theory. Nat. Commun. 14, 6979 (2023)

    2023

  17. [25]

    Yesilkoy, F. et al. Ultrasensitive hyperspectral imaging and biodetection enabled by dielectric metasurfaces. Nat. Photonics 13, 390–396 (2019)

    2019

  18. [26]

    Dun, X. et al. Learned rotationally symmetric diffractive achromat for full-spectrum computational imaging. Optica 7, 913–922 (2020)

    2020

  19. [27]

    Ballard, Z., Brown, C., Madni, A. M. & Ozcan, A. Machine learning and computation- enabled intelligent sensor design. Nat. Mach. Intell. 3, 556–565 (2021)

    2021

  20. [28]

    & Ozcan, A

    Mengu, D., Tabassum, A., Jarrahi, M. & Ozcan, A. Snapshot multi-spectral imaging using a diffractive optical network. Light Sci. Appl. 12, 86 (2023)

    2023

  21. [29]

    Lin, X. et al. All-optical machine learning using diffractive deep neural networks. Science 361, 1004–1008 (2018). 21

    2018

  22. [30]

    Rahman, M. S. S., Yang, X., Li, J., Bai, B. & Ozcan, A. Universal linear intensity transformations using spatially incoherent diffractive processors. Light Sci. Appl. 12, 195 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    Yang, X., Rahman, M. S. S., Bai, B., Li, J. & Ozcan, A. Complex-valued universal linear transformations and image encryption using spatially incoherent diffractive networks. Adv. Photonics Nexus 3, 016010–016010 (2024)

    2024

  24. [32]

    & Ozcan, A

    Kulce, O., Mengu, D., Rivenson, Y. & Ozcan, A. All-optical synthesis of an arbitrary linear transformation using diffractive surfaces. Light Sci. Appl. 10, 196 (2021)

    2021

  25. [33]

    & Weinberger, K

    Huang, G., Liu, Z., Van Der Maaten, L. & Weinberger, K. Q. Densely connected convolutional networks. in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition 4700–4708 (2017)

    2017

  26. [34]

    & Brox, T

    Ronneberger, O., Fischer, P. & Brox, T. U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation. in International Conference on Medical image computing and computer- assisted intervention 234–241 (Springer, 2015)

    2015

  27. [35]

    & Sun, J

    He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S. & Sun, J. Delving deep into rectifiers: Surpassing human-level performance on imagenet classification. in Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision 1026–1034 (2015)

    2015

  28. [36]

    Paszke, A. et al. Pytorch: An imperative style, high-performance deep learning library. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 32, (2019)

    2019

  29. [37]

    Y., Novaliandry, D

    Basri, I. Y., Novaliandry, D. & Tania, I. M. Design and Development of Inductive Sensor Trainer Based on Arduino and IDE 1.8. 19 Software. J. Teknol. Inf. Dan Pendidik. 15, (2022)

    2022

  30. [38]

    Greenbaum, A. et al. Imaging without lenses: achievements and remaining challenges of wide-field on-chip microscopy. Nat. Methods 9, 889–895 (2012). 22

    2012

  31. [39]

    Greenbaum, A. et al. Wide-field computational imaging of pathology slides using lens- free on-chip microscopy. Sci. Transl. Med. 6, (2014)

    2014

  32. [40]

    A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms

    Otsu, N. A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms. Automatica 11, 23–27 (1975)

    1975

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.