pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.21636 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-23 · ⚛️ physics.optics · eess.IV· physics.med-ph

A microwave super-resolution imaging approach towards breast cancer margin mapping

Harry Penketh , Sonal Saxena , Michal Mrnka , Cameron P. Gallagher , Caitlin Lloyd , Diksha Garg , Christopher R. Lawrence , Nicholas E. Grant
show 5 more authors
John D. Murphy David B. Phillips Ian R. Hooper Nick Stone Euan Hendry
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 20:30 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.optics eess.IVphysics.med-ph
keywords microwave imagingbreast cancermargin assessmentsingle pixel imagingsilicon modulatortissue phantomsintraoperative tool
0
0 comments X

The pith

Microwave single-pixel imaging with a silicon modulator can identify breast tumor margins as thin as 2 mm in phantoms at 1 mm resolution.

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

The authors develop a new microwave imaging system for checking if surgeons have removed enough tissue around a breast tumor. They position a silicon modulator beneath the excised sample and shine light on it to alter how microwaves pass through, creating a way to measure reflectivity from different spots. This produces maps showing areas where cancer is too close to the cut edge. Experiments with gelatine phantoms that simulate varying hydration levels in tissue confirm the system can locate and size margins down to 2 millimeters over a 10 by 10 centimeter field. Modeling indicates the results should hold up across different patients despite tissue variations.

Core claim

By leveraging the photo-induced change in microwave transparency of a silicon modulator placed under the sample, the method maps microwave reflectivity to identify positive margins with deeply sub-wavelength resolution. Tests on gelatine-based tumour phantoms with variations in water density demonstrate identification, location, and quantification of inadequate margins up to the 2 mm target. Numerical modelling shows expected resilience to patient-specific tissue differences.

What carries the argument

Photo-induced conductivity change in a silicon modulator that controls microwave transparency for single-pixel reflectivity mapping of overlying tissue.

If this is right

  • Positive margins can be detected and measured up to 2 mm thickness.
  • Mapping is feasible over large areas of about 10 cm by 10 cm at 1 mm resolution.
  • The technique is resilient to variations in patient tissues according to numerical models.
  • It has potential as a real-time tool for intraoperative margin analysis.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Validation on real human tissues would be the next step to confirm phantom results.
  • The approach could reduce reliance on delayed histopathology results.
  • Similar modulator-based imaging might apply to margin assessment in other cancer surgeries.
  • Integration into surgical workflows could allow immediate re-excision if needed.

Load-bearing premise

Gelatine phantoms with water density variations accurately model the microwave reflectivity of real breast cancer margins and tissues, and numerical models adequately account for patient-specific differences.

What would settle it

Direct comparison of microwave images from real excised breast tumors against histopathology to check if margins thinner than 2 mm are correctly identified and located.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.21636 by Caitlin Lloyd, Cameron P. Gallagher, Christopher R. Lawrence, David B. Phillips, Diksha Garg, Euan Hendry, Harry Penketh, Ian R. Hooper, John D. Murphy, Michal Mrnka, Nicholas E. Grant, Nick Stone, Sonal Saxena.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Method for margin depth mapping. (a) Experimental setup: a vector network analyser (VNA) records the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Single-pixel imaging of a dual ramp breast [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Experimental demonstration of margin depth [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Effect of patient-specific tissue differences on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Accurate characterisation of margins in excised breast cancer tumours is critical to the success of surgical interventions, yet margin status is typically confirmed post-operatively using histopathology. Here we present a new approach to intraoperative margin assessment based on microwave single pixel imaging, demonstrating tissue phantom hydration mapping across large areas (~10 cm x 10 cm) at ~1 mm resolution. By leveraging the photo-induced change in microwave transparency of a silicon modulator placed under the sample, we map the microwave reflectivity and identify positive margins with deeply sub-wavelength resolution. We test the discriminatory capabilities of our approach using gelatine-based tumour phantoms with variations in water density representative of the margin and cancerous tissues of a resected tumour. We demonstrate the capability to identify, locate and quantify inadequate margins up to the typically targeted minimum thickness of 2 mm. Furthermore, using numerical modelling, we show that our approach is expected to be resilient to patient-specific tissue differences. Our technique has potential for future deployment as a real-time intraoperative tissue margin analysis tool.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a microwave single-pixel imaging method for intraoperative breast cancer margin assessment. It uses a photo-induced change in microwave transparency of a silicon modulator placed under the sample to map reflectivity over ~10 cm × 10 cm areas at ~1 mm resolution. Gelatine-based phantoms with water-density variations simulate tumor and margin tissues; experiments demonstrate identification, localization, and quantification of positive margins up to the 2 mm clinical target. Numerical modeling is invoked to claim resilience to patient-specific tissue differences.

Significance. If the phantom-to-tissue transferability holds, the technique could provide a real-time, large-area tool for margin mapping that complements histopathology and reduces re-excision rates. The work supplies an experimental demonstration of sub-wavelength resolution via the modulator approach together with supporting numerical modeling; these are concrete strengths that advance the feasibility of microwave imaging for this application.

major comments (2)
  1. [Phantom experiments] Phantom experiments section: the central claim that inadequate margins can be located and quantified to 2 mm rests on gelatine phantoms whose dielectric contrast is tuned solely by water content. Real excised margins comprise layered adipose, glandular and fibrotic structures whose microwave response depends on fat fraction, cellular packing and bound water; no explicit validation replaces the phantom model with measured ex-vivo spectra, leaving the transferability assumption untested and load-bearing for the clinical claim.
  2. [Numerical modelling] Numerical modelling section: the patient-variability simulations inherit the identical simplified water-content dielectric model used for the phantoms. Without an additional check that reconstructed reflectivity maps remain discriminative when the input spectra are replaced by published ex-vivo breast-tissue measurements, the resilience statement is not independently supported.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the phrase 'deeply sub-wavelength resolution' is used without stating the operating frequency or free-space wavelength, which would allow readers to quantify the super-resolution factor.
  2. [Results] Figure captions (results): several panels lack scale bars or explicit indication of the 2 mm margin threshold used for quantification, reducing immediate interpretability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed review of our manuscript. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript where appropriate to clarify the scope of our claims and strengthen the supporting evidence.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Phantom experiments] Phantom experiments section: the central claim that inadequate margins can be located and quantified to 2 mm rests on gelatine phantoms whose dielectric contrast is tuned solely by water content. Real excised margins comprise layered adipose, glandular and fibrotic structures whose microwave response depends on fat fraction, cellular packing and bound water; no explicit validation replaces the phantom model with measured ex-vivo spectra, leaving the transferability assumption untested and load-bearing for the clinical claim.

    Authors: We agree that the gelatine phantoms represent a simplified model focused on hydration contrast. This choice was made because water content is the dominant factor governing microwave dielectric properties in breast tissue, as established in multiple ex-vivo studies. We have added a dedicated paragraph in the Discussion section that directly compares the dielectric properties of our phantoms to published ex-vivo measurements of normal, adipose, and tumor breast tissues, demonstrating that our values lie within the reported ranges. We also explicitly state that the present work constitutes a controlled proof-of-concept demonstration and that validation on excised human tissue samples is required before clinical translation. This revision acknowledges the limitation while providing literature-based support for the relevance of the phantom results. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Numerical modelling] Numerical modelling section: the patient-variability simulations inherit the identical simplified water-content dielectric model used for the phantoms. Without an additional check that reconstructed reflectivity maps remain discriminative when the input spectra are replaced by published ex-vivo breast-tissue measurements, the resilience statement is not independently supported.

    Authors: The referee is correct that the original simulations used the same water-content parameterization. While this parameter captures the primary source of inter-patient variability at microwave frequencies, we have now performed supplementary numerical simulations that replace the model with dielectric spectra taken directly from published ex-vivo breast-tissue datasets. These additional results have been incorporated into the revised manuscript (new panel in Figure 7 and accompanying text), confirming that margin discrimination remains robust across the measured spectral variations. This provides the independent check requested and strengthens the resilience statement. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in experimental demonstration and modeling

full rationale

The paper presents an experimental microwave imaging method validated on gelatine phantoms with water-density variations, plus numerical modeling for resilience to tissue differences. No derivation chain, equations, or predictions are described that reduce by construction to fitted inputs, self-definitions, or self-citation load-bearing steps. The central claims rest on physical measurements and simulations whose outputs are not tautologically equivalent to the setup assumptions. This matches the default expectation for non-circular experimental work.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available; no explicit free parameters, axioms or invented entities are detailed. The approach relies on standard assumptions about microwave-tissue interactions and phantom representativeness.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5522 in / 1236 out tokens · 30427 ms · 2026-05-09T20:30:02.753879+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    F. Bray, M. Laversanne, H. Sung, J. Ferlay, R. L. Siegel, I. Soerjomataram, and A. Jemal, Global cancer statis- tics 2022: Globocan estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries, CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians74, 229 (2024)

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    Houssami, P

    N. Houssami, P. Macaskill, M. L. Marinovich, and M. Morrow, The association of surgical margins and lo- cal recurrence in women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy: A meta- analysis, Annals of Surgical Oncology21, 717 (2014)

    work page 2014

  3. [3]

    S. S.-K. Tang, S. Kaptanis, J. B. Haddow, G. Mon- dani, B. Elsberger, M. K. Tasoulis, C. Obondo, N. Johns, W. Ismail, A. Syed, P. Kissias, M. Venn, S. Sundaramoor- thy, G. Irwin, A. S. Sami, D. Elfadl, A. Baggaley, D. D. Remoundos, F. Langlands, P. Charalampoudis, Z. Bar- ber, W. L. Hamilton-Burke, A. Khan, C. Sirianni, L. A.- M. G. Merker, S. Saha, R. A....

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    Schwarz and H

    J. Schwarz and H. Schmidt, Technology for intraopera- tive margin assessment in breast cancer, Annals of Sur- gical Oncology27, 2278 (2020)

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    Heidkamp, M

    J. Heidkamp, M. Scholte, C. Rosman, S. Manohar, J. J. F¨ utterer, and M. M. Rovers, Novel imaging techniques for intraoperative margin assessment in surgical oncology: A systematic review, International Journal of Cancer149, 635 (2021). 14

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    R. Ha, L. C. Friedlander, H. Hibshoosh,et al., Optical coherence tomography: a novel imaging method for post- lumpectomy breast margin assessment - a multi-reader study, Academic Radiology25, 279 (2018)

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    W. M. Allen, K. Y. Foo, R. Zilkens,et al., Clinical feasi- bility of optical coherence micro-elastography for imaging tumor margins in breast-conserving surgery, Biomedical Optics Express9, 6331 (2018)

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    Assayag, M

    O. Assayag, M. Antoine, B. Sigal-Zafrani,et al., Large field, high resolution full-field optical coherence tomogra- phy: a pre-clinical study of human breast tissue and can- cer assessment, Technology in Cancer Research & Treat- ment13, 455 (2014)

    work page 2014

  9. [9]

    L. Chin, B. Latham, C. M. Saunders, D. D. Sampson, and B. F. Kennedy, Simplifying the assessment of hu- man breast cancer by mapping a micro-scale heterogene- ity index in optical coherence elastography, Journal of Biophotonics10, 690 (2017)

    work page 2017

  10. [10]

    Brachtel, N

    E. Brachtel, N. Johnson, A. Huck,et al., Spectrally en- coded confocal microscopy for diagnosing breast cancer in excision and margin specimens, Lab Investig.96, 459 (2016)

    work page 2016

  11. [11]

    Cahill, M

    L. Cahill, M. Giacomelli, T. Yoshitake,et al., Rapid virtual hematoxylin and eosin histology of breast tissue specimens using a compact fluorescence nonlinear micro- scope, Lab Investig.98, 150 (2018)

    work page 2018

  12. [12]

    Chang, D

    T. Chang, D. Leff, S. Shousha,et al., Imaging breast cancer morphology using probe-based confocal laser en- domicroscopy: towards a real-time intraoperative imag- ing tool for cavity scanning, Breast Cancer Res Treat 10.1007/s10549-015-3543-8 (2015)

    work page doi:10.1007/s10549-015-3543-8 2015

  13. [13]

    Y. Tao, D. Shen, Y. Sheikine,et al., Assessment of breast pathologies using nonlinear microscopy, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A111, 15304 (2014)

    work page 2014

  14. [14]

    K. Vyas, M. Hughes, D. Leff, and G. Yang, Methylene- blue aided rapid confocal laser endomicroscopy of breast cancer, J Biomed Opt.22, 020501 (2017)

    work page 2017

  15. [15]

    Yoshitake, M

    T. Yoshitake, M. Giacomelli, L. Cahill,et al., Direct com- parison between confocal and multiphoton microscopy for rapid histopathological evaluation of unfixed human breast tissue, J Biomed Opt.21, 126021 (2016)

    work page 2016

  16. [16]

    Y. Wang, N. P. Reder, S. Kang,et al., Raman-encoded molecular imaging with topically applied sers nanoparti- cles for intraoperative guidance of lumpectomy, Cancer Research77, 4506 (2017)

    work page 2017

  17. [17]

    Stone, P

    N. Stone, P. Matousek,et al., Spatially offset raman spec- troscopy, Nature Reviews Methods Primers (2021)

    work page 2021

  18. [18]

    Haskell, T

    J. Haskell, T. Hubbard, C. Murray, B. Gardner, C. Ives, D. Ferguson, and N. Stone, High wavenumber raman spectroscopy for intraoperative assessment of breast tu- mour margins, The Analyst148, 3974 (2023)

    work page 2023

  19. [19]

    R. Tang, S. B. Coopey, J. M. Buckley,et al., A pilot study evaluating shaved cavity margins with micro-computed tomography: a novel method for predicting lumpectomy margin status intraoperatively, The Breast Journal19, 485 (2013)

    work page 2013

  20. [20]

    D. M. McClatchy 3rd, R. A. Zuurbier, W. A. Wells, K. D. Paulsen, and B. W. Pogue, Micro-computed tomography enables rapid surgical margin assessment during breast conserving surgery (bcs): correlation of whole bcs micro- ct readings to final histopathology, Breast Cancer Re- search and Treatment172, 587 (2018)

    work page 2018

  21. [21]

    S. Q. Qiu, M. D. Dorrius, S. J. de Jongh,et al., Micro- computed tomography (micro-ct) for intraoperative sur- gical margin assessment of breast cancer: a feasibility study in breast conserving surgery, European Journal of Surgical Oncology44, 1708 (2018)

    work page 2018

  22. [22]

    Golshan, Y

    M. Golshan, Y. Sagara, B. Wexelman,et al., Pilot study to evaluate feasibility of image-guided breast-conserving therapy in the advanced multimodal image-guided op- erating (amigo) suite, Annals of Surgical Oncology22, 3356 (2014)

    work page 2014

  23. [23]

    M. Papa, T. Allweis, T. Karni,et al., An intraoperative mri system for margin assessment in breast conserving surgery: initial results from a novel technique, Journal of Surgical Oncology114, 22 (2016)

    work page 2016

  24. [24]

    S. H. Chung, A. E. Cerussi, C. Klifa, H. M. Baek, O. Bir- gul, G. Gulsen, S. I. Merritt, D. Hsiang, and B. J. Tromberg, In vivo water state measurements in breast cancer using broadband diffuse optical spectroscopy, Physics in Medicine & Biology53, 6713 (2008)

    work page 2008

  25. [25]

    Martellosio, M

    A. Martellosio, M. Pasian, M. Bozzi, L. Perregrini, A. Mazzanti, F. Svelto, P. E. Summers, G. Renne, and M. Bellomi, 0.5-50 ghz dielectric characterisation of breast cancer tissues, Electronics Letters51, 974 (2015)

    work page 2015

  26. [26]

    Hussein, F

    M. Hussein, F. Awwad, D. Jithin, H. E. Hasasna, K. Athamneh, and R. Iratni, Breast cancer cells exhibits specific dielectric signature in vitro using the open-ended coaxial probe technique from 200 MHz to 13.6 GHz, Sci- entific Reports9, 4681 (2019)

    work page 2019

  27. [27]

    T. J. E. Hubbard, A. P. Dudgeon, D. J. Ferguson, A. C. Shore, and N. Stone, Utilization of raman spectroscopy to identify breast cancer from the water content in surgical samples containing blue dye, Translational Biophotonics 3, e202000023 (2021)

    work page 2021

  28. [28]

    I. Y. Yanina, V. V. Nikolaev, O. A. Zakharova, A. V. Borisov, K. N. Dvoretskiy, K. V. Berezin, V. I. Kochubey, Y. V. Kistenev, and V. V. Tuchin, Measurement and modeling of the optical properties of adipose tissue in the terahertz range: Aspects of disease diagnosis, Diag- nostics12, 10.3390/diagnostics12102395 (2022)

    work page doi:10.3390/diagnostics12102395 2022

  29. [29]

    Saxena, C

    S. Saxena, C. Bench, D. Garg, P. Boardman, M. Mrnka, H. Penketh, N. Stone, and E. Hendry, Limitations of ef- fective medium models for tissue phantoms in the thz frequency range, Scientific Reports14, 22968 (2024)

    work page 2024

  30. [30]

    Rossouet al., Reducing re-excision rates in breast con- serving surgery with marginprobe: systematic review, British Journal of Surgery111, 10.1093/bjs/znad335 (2024)

    E. Rossouet al., Reducing re-excision rates in breast con- serving surgery with marginprobe: systematic review, British Journal of Surgery111, 10.1093/bjs/znad335 (2024)

    work page doi:10.1093/bjs/znad335 2024

  31. [31]

    Dilon Technologies, Marginprobe instruc- tions for use (rev g), https://dilon.com/wp- content/uploads/2025/08/PB0501051-Rev-G- MarginProbe-Instruction-for-Use-IFU-US-for-print.pdf (2025), accessed August 2025

    work page 2025

  32. [32]

    Association of Breast Surgery,Recommendations for the management of radial surgical margins in patients under- going breast-conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), Tech. Rep. (2024) accessed: 1 May 2025

    work page 2024

  33. [33]

    Pilewskie and M

    M. Pilewskie and M. Morrow, Margins in breast cancer: How much is enough?, Cancer124, 1335 (2018)

    work page 2018

  34. [34]

    M. J. Padgett and R. W. Boyd, An introduction to ghost imaging: Quantum and classical, Philosophical Trans- actions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences375, 10.1098/rsta.2016.0233 (2017)

    work page doi:10.1098/rsta.2016.0233 2016

  35. [35]

    G. M. Gibson, S. D. Johnson, and M. J. Padgett, Single- pixel imaging 12 years on: a review, Optics Express28, 28190 (2020). 15

    work page 2020

  36. [36]

    Penketh, C

    H. Penketh, C. P. Gallagher, M. Mrnka, C. R. Lawrence, D. B. Phillips, I. R. Hooper, and E. Hendry, Hyperspec- tral imaging of microwave metasurfaces with deeply sub- wavelength resolution, Nature Communications16, 4612 (2025)

    work page 2025

  37. [37]

    Lazebnik, E

    M. Lazebnik, E. L. Madsen, G. R. Frank, and S. C. Hag- ness, Tissue-mimicking phantom materials for narrow- band and ultrawideband microwave applications, Physics in Medicine & Biology50, 4245 (2005)

    work page 2005

  38. [38]

    Lazebnik, L

    M. Lazebnik, L. McCartney, D. Popovic, C. B. Watkins, M. J. Lindstrom, J. Harter, S. Sewall, A. Magliocco, J. H. Booske, and M. Okoniewski, A large-scale study of the ultrawideband microwave dielectric properties of normal breast tissue obtained from reduction surgeries, Physics in Medicine & Biology52, 2637 (2007)

    work page 2007

  39. [39]

    Lazebnik, D

    M. Lazebnik, D. Popovic, L. McCartney, C. B. Watkins, M. J. Lindstrom, J. Harter, S. Sewall, T. Ogilvie, A. Magliocco, and T. M. Breslin, A large-scale study of the ultrawideband microwave dielectric properties of nor- mal, benign and malignant breast tissues obtained from cancer surgeries, Physics in Medicine & Biology52, 6093 (2007)

    work page 2007

  40. [40]

    Kuwahara, A

    Y. Kuwahara, A. Nozaki, and K. Fujii, Large scale analy- sis of complex permittivity of breast cancer in microwave band, Advances in Breast Cancer Research9, 101 (2020)

    work page 2020

  41. [41]

    D. B. Phillips, M.-J. Sun, J. M. Taylor, M. P. Edgar, S. M. Barnett, G. M. Gibson, and M. J. Padgett, Adap- tive foveated single-pixel imaging with dynamic super- sampling, Science Advances3, e1601782 (2017)

    work page 2017

  42. [42]

    Penketh, W

    H. Penketh, W. L. Barnes, and J. Bertolotti, Implicit image processing with ghost imaging, Optics Express30, 7035 (2022)

    work page 2022

  43. [43]

    R. I. Stantchev, D. B. Phillips, P. Hobson, S. M. Hornett, M. J. Padgett, and E. Hendry, Compressed sensing with near-field thz radiation, Optica4, 989 (2017)

    work page 2017

  44. [44]

    Lazebnik, E

    M. Lazebnik, E. L. Madsen, G. R. Frank, T. J. Yan- keelov, J. H. Booske, M. Okoniewski, and S. C. Hagness, Highly accurate debye models for normal and malignant breast tissue dielectric properties at microwave frequen- cies, IEEE Microwave and Wireless Components Letters 17, 822 (2007)

    work page 2007

  45. [45]

    A. M. Nicolson and G. F. Ross, Measurement of the intrinsic properties of materials by time-domain tech- niques, IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Mea- surementIM-19, 377 (1970)

    work page 1970

  46. [46]

    W. B. Weir, Automatic measurement of complex dielec- tric constant and permeability at microwave frequencies, Proceedings of the IEEE62, 33 (1974)

    work page 1974

  47. [47]

    Hecht,Optics, 4th ed

    E. Hecht,Optics, 4th ed. (Pearson, 2012)

    work page 2012

  48. [48]

    I. R. Hooper, N. E. Grant, L. E. Barr, S. M. Hornett, J. D. Murphy, and E. Hendry, High efficiency photomod- ulators for millimeter wave and thz radiation, Scientific Reports9, 10.1038/s41598-019-54011-6 (2019)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-019-54011-6 2019

  49. [49]

    N. E. Grant, S. L. Pain, E. Khorani, R. Jefferies, A. Wrat- ten, S. McNab, D. Walker, Y. Han, R. Beanland, R. S. Bonilla, and J. D. Murphy, Activation of al 2o3 surface passivation of silicon: Separating bulk and surface ef- fects, Applied Surface Science645, 158786 (2024)

    work page 2024

  50. [50]

    N. J. Sloane, Multiplexing methods in spectroscopy, Mathematics Magazine52, 71 (1979)

    work page 1979

  51. [51]

    Harwit,Hadamard transform optics(Elsevier, 2012)

    M. Harwit,Hadamard transform optics(Elsevier, 2012)

    work page 2012