Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Opt Lett ; 38(15): 2792-5, 2013 Aug 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23903144

ABSTRACT

High-efficiency dynamic holography at 1.55 µm is demonstrated in a broad-area InGaAs/InP multiple-quantum-well vertical microcavity. The design places single quantum wells at the cavity antinodes, reducing mode-pulling and enabling a higher Q-factor. The device is pumped by interference fringes through an amorphous mirror that is transparent to a high-energy hologram writing pulse at a wavelength of 1.06 µm. Optically pumped free carrier gratings are probed by a tunable 1.5 µm laser in a four-wave mixing configuration. Diffraction efficiency into both m=±1 diffraction orders of 35% (70% total) has been obtained with a phase grating contribution approaching the maximum π phase shift by combining absorption bleaching with asymmetric Fabry-Perot reflectivity. The diffracted signal exhibits rise/fall times of 5 ns, demonstrating the high speed capabilities of this device.

2.
Angle Orthod ; 80(2): 286-94, 2010 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19905853

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate systematic differences in landmark position between cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-generated cephalograms and conventional digital cephalograms and to estimate how much variability should be taken into account when both modalities are used within the same longitudinal study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Landmarks on homologous cone-beam computed tomographic-generated cephalograms and conventional digital cephalograms of 46 patients were digitized, registered, and compared via the Hotelling T(2) test. RESULTS: There were no systematic differences between modalities in the position of most landmarks. Three landmarks showed statistically significant differences but did not reach clinical significance. A method for error calculation while combining both modalities in the same individual is presented. CONCLUSION: In a longitudinal follow-up for assessment of treatment outcomes and growth of one individual, the error due to the combination of the two modalities might be larger than previously estimated.


Subject(s)
Cephalometry/methods , Cone-Beam Computed Tomography , Diagnostic Errors , Radiography, Dental, Digital , Skull/diagnostic imaging , Adolescent , Adult , Bias , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Middle Aged , Patient Positioning , Reference Values , Reproducibility of Results , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...