arXiv:2511.09587physics.opticseess.IV2025-11被引 1

首次用SPAD阵列数据验证了三种光学模拟器,为非接触式成像选型提供标准。

Systematic validation of time-resolved diffuse optical simulators via non-contact SPAD-based measurements

  • 用统一网格和虚拟源修正法对比三款开源模拟器性能
  • MMC在空间与时间精度上最优,尤其适合高精度需求场景
  • 首次在临床相关非接触条件下完成系统性验证,适合科研与设备开发

目的:时域漫射光学成像(DOI)需要精确的光子传播前向模型。然而现有模拟器缺乏全面实验验证,尤其是在非接触配置与斜入射条件下。本研究通过时间分辨实验数据,严格评估了三种广泛使用的开源模拟器(MMC、NIRFASTer、Toast++)。所有模拟采用统一网格和点源照明,对有限元法求解器应用虚拟源修正以处理斜入射。使用32×32单光子雪崩二极管(SPAD)阵列的时间分辨成像系统,采集了16个标准化胶体的透射模式数据,其吸收系数μ_a与减小散射系数μ_s'各不相同。通过五个指标量化结果:空间域(SD)精度、时间域(TD)精度、斜束准确性、计算速度及网格密度无关性。结果显示,MMC在SD与TD指标上表现最佳,且对各类光学参数均具鲁棒性;NIRFASTer与Toast++整体性能相近。总体而言,MMC适用于对精度要求高的时域DOI应用,而NIRFASTer与Toast++适合侧重速度且μ_s'足够大的场景。此外,虚拟源修正对非接触有限元建模至关重要,在大角度情形下使平均误差降低超过34%。意义:本工作为下一代时域DOI系统开发阶段的模拟器选择提供了基准指南。这是首个基于SPAD阵列数据,在临床相关的非接触条件下系统性验证时域模拟器的研究,填补了生物医学光学模拟标准中的关键空白。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Objective: Time-domain diffuse optical imaging (DOI) requires accurate forward models for photon propagation in scattering media. However, existing simulators lack comprehensive experimental validation, especially for non-contact configurations with oblique illumination. This study rigorously evaluates three widely used open-source simulators, including MMC, NIRFASTer, and Toast++, using time-resolved experimental data. Approach: All simulations employed a unified mesh and point-source illumination. Virtual source correction was applied to FEM solvers for oblique incidence. A time-resolved DOI system with a 32 $\times$ 32 single-photon avalanche diode (SPAD) array acquired transmission-mode data from 16 standardized phantoms with varying absorption coefficient $μ_a$ and reduced scattering coefficient $μ_s'$. The simulation results were quantified across five metrics: spatial-domain (SD) precision, time-domain (TD) precision, oblique beam accuracy, computational speed, and mesh-density independence. Results: Among three simulators, MMC achieves superior accuracy in SD and TD metrics, and shows robustness across all optical properties. NIRFASTer and Toast++ demonstrate comparable overall performance. In general, MMC is optimal for accuracy-critical TD-DOI applications, while NIRFASTer and Toast++ suit scenarios prioritizing speed with sufficiently large $μ_s'$. Besides, virtual source correction is essential for non-contact FEM modeling, which reduced average errors by > 34% in large-angle scenarios. Significance: This work provides benchmarked guidelines for simulator selection during the development phase of next-generation TD-DOI systems. Our work represents the first study to systematically validate TD simulators against SPAD array-based data under clinically relevant non-contact conditions, bridging a critical gap in biomedical optical simulation standards.

光学成像模拟验证SPAD阵列非接触测量

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。