179 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27857282)
1. Measurement of microfibril angles in bamboo using Mueller matrix imaging.
Mannan S; Zaffar M; Pradhan A; Basu S
Appl Opt; 2016 Nov; 55(32):8971-8978. PubMed ID: 27857282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Spatially-localized bench-top X-ray scattering reveals tissue-specific microfibril orientation in Moso bamboo.
Ahvenainen P; Dixon PG; Kallonen A; Suhonen H; Gibson LJ; Svedström K
Plant Methods; 2017; 13():5. PubMed ID: 28077951
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Variation of microfibril angle in Dendrocalamus farinosus analyzed based on X-ray diffraction spectrum and its effect on tensile properties].
Liu XE; Yang X; Yang SM; Tian GL; Shang LL
Guang Pu Xue Yu Guang Pu Fen Xi; 2014 Jun; 34(6):1698-701. PubMed ID: 25358191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Polar decomposition of 3 x 3 Mueller matrix: a tool for quantitative tissue polarimetry.
Swami MK; Manhas S; Buddhiwant P; Ghosh N; Uppal A; Gupta PK
Opt Express; 2006 Oct; 14(20):9324-37. PubMed ID: 19529316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparative study of the influence of imaging resolution on linear retardance parameters derived from the Mueller matrix.
Shen Y; Huang R; He H; Liu S; Dong Y; Wu J; Ma H
Biomed Opt Express; 2021 Jan; 12(1):211-225. PubMed ID: 33659076
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparative study of differential matrix and extended polar decomposition formalisms for polarimetric characterization of complex tissue-like turbid media.
Kumar S; Purwar H; Ossikovski R; Vitkin IA; Ghosh N
J Biomed Opt; 2012 Oct; 17(10):105006. PubMed ID: 23064484
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Mueller-matrix imaging polarimetry elevated by wavelet decomposition and polarization-singular processing for analysis of specific cancerous tissue pathology.
Sdobnov A; Ushenko VA; Trifonyuk L; Bakun O; Garazdyuk M; Soltys IV; Dubolazov O; Ushenko OG; Ushenko YA; Bykov A; Meglinski I
J Biomed Opt; 2023 Oct; 28(10):102903. PubMed ID: 37425430
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Photopolarimetric measurement of single, intact pulp fibers by mueller matrix imaging polarimetry.
Ye C
Appl Opt; 1999 Apr; 38(10):1975-85. PubMed ID: 18319753
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Optimum selection of input polarization states in determining the sample Mueller matrix: a dual photoelastic polarimeter approach.
Layden D; Wood MF; Vitkin IA
Opt Express; 2012 Aug; 20(18):20466-81. PubMed ID: 23037095
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Polarization-resolved Stokes-Mueller imaging: a review of technology and applications.
K U S; Mahato KK; Mazumder N
Lasers Med Sci; 2019 Sep; 34(7):1283-1293. PubMed ID: 30830559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Analyzing the Influence of Imaging Resolution on Polarization Properties of Scattering Media Obtained From Mueller Matrix.
Shao C; Chen B; He H; He C; Shen Y; Zhai H; Ma H
Front Chem; 2022; 10():936255. PubMed ID: 35903191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Characterization and classification of ductal carcinoma tissue using four channel based stokes-mueller polarimetry and machine learning.
Ku S; Kaniyala Melanthota S; U R; Rai S; Mahato KK; Mazumder N
Lasers Med Sci; 2024 May; 39(1):123. PubMed ID: 38703302
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Birefringence effect studies of collagen formed by nonenzymatic glycation using dual-retarder Mueller polarimetry.
Lien CH; Chen ZH; Phan QH
J Biomed Opt; 2022 Aug; 27(8):087001. PubMed ID: 36452033
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparative study of the imaging contrasts of Mueller matrix derived parameters between transmission and backscattering polarimetry.
Liu T; Sun T; He H; Liu S; Dong Y; Wu J; Ma H
Biomed Opt Express; 2018 Sep; 9(9):4413-4428. PubMed ID: 30615708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Fiber Characteristics and Mechanical Properties of
Yu L; Dai F; Zhang K; Jiang Z; Xia M; Wang Y; Tian G
Plants (Basel); 2023 Aug; 12(16):. PubMed ID: 37631198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Characterizing the Effects of Washing by Different Detergents on the Wavelength-Scale Microstructures of Silk Samples Using Mueller Matrix Polarimetry.
Dong Y; He H; He C; Zhou J; Zeng N; Ma H
Int J Mol Sci; 2016 Aug; 17(8):. PubMed ID: 27517919
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Mueller matrix imaging of prostate bulk tissues; Polarization parameters as a discriminating benchmark.
Badieyan S; Ameri A; Razzaghi MR; Rafii-Tabar H; Sasanpour P
Photodiagnosis Photodyn Ther; 2019 Jun; 26():90-96. PubMed ID: 30797118
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Discrepancy of coordinate system selection in backscattering Mueller matrix polarimetry: exploring photon coordinate system transformation invariants.
Hao R; Zeng N; Zhang Z; He H; He C; Ma H
Opt Express; 2024 Jan; 32(3):3804-3816. PubMed ID: 38297593
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Mueller-matrix polarimeter using analysis of the nonlinear voltage-retardance relationship for liquid-crystal variable retarders.
López-Téllez JM; Bruce NC
Appl Opt; 2014 Aug; 53(24):5359-66. PubMed ID: 25321106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Polarization phase unwrapping by a dual-wavelength Mueller matrix imaging system.
Song J; Guo W; Zeng N; Ma H
Opt Lett; 2023 Apr; 48(8):2058-2061. PubMed ID: 37058641
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
