Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 45 references

Mie scattering due to tissue structures in the terahertz regime: Experimental and Monte Carlo verification using diffused polarimetric imaging in highly attenuating tissue phantoms

T0 review · 4 major / 6 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 Polarimetric terahertz imaging can detect tissue structure changes through Mie-scattering contrast in diffuse backscattered light, as shown by Monte Carlo simulation, phantom experiments, and an ex vivo porcine burn.

desk verdict New phantom and burn data extend the group's Monte Carlo work, but two of four phantoms show the opposite DOP trend from the model, so the verification claim is not yet solid. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.00630 v1 pith:JCZJLPHE submitted 2024-12-31 physics.med-ph physics.bio-phphysics.optics

Erica Heller , Kuangyi Xu , Zachery Harris , M. Hassan Arbab This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.med-phphysics.bio-phphysics.optics
keywords terahertzimagingpolarimetryMiescatteringMonteCarlosimulationdegreeofpolarizationtissuephantomsburninjurydiffusereflectance
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

The paper argues that polarimetric terahertz imaging can detect disease-related structural changes in tissue by measuring how diffuse backscattered light is depolarized by Mie scattering from internal particles. It builds a Monte Carlo model of polarized THz transport in absorbing tissue, extracts Mueller matrices and their Lu-Chipman decomposition, and shows that the diffuse reflectance and degree of polarization (DOP) vary systematically with scatterer size. Phantom experiments with polypropylene spheres in gelatin reproduce the simulated trends, and an ex vivo porcine burn shows DOP and intensity contrast between burned and healthy skin. The authors conclude that these signals could become diagnostic markers for conditions such as tumor budding and burn injuries.

What carries the argument

The central object is a polarized-light Monte Carlo transport model of terahertz radiation in an absorbing medium containing Mie-scattering spheres, built on the Meridian Plane Polarized Light Monte Carlo code with a Mie calculator that computes scattering and absorption coefficients, the asymmetry parameter, and the scattering matrix from the measured dielectric properties of the medium and particles. From simulated spatial Stokes maps for four incident polarization states, the full Mueller matrix is constructed and decomposed with the Lu-Chipman polar decomposition, showing that each phantom acts as a uniform attenuator times a depolarizer. Because the depolarizer is characterized by a single linear degree of polarization parameter, the model predicts that one polarization measurement (linear or circular) suffices to capture the polarimetric response, and the experimental DOP follows from the spatially averaged Stokes parameters.

What would settle it

Measure the diffuse DOP and intensity of a phantom with a fixed internal particle size while deliberately varying the surface roughness from smooth to a known RMS height; if the DOP spectrum shifts as much as it does when particle diameter changes from 115 to 280 µm, then surface roughness, not internal Mie scattering, could explain the observed contrast.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the diffuse backscattered intensity and the degree of polarization of broadband terahertz light carry a quantifiable signature of the size of Mie-scattering particles embedded in a highly attenuating medium, and that this signature is observable in tissue-like phantoms and in ex vivo burned skin. The paper demonstrates through Monte Carlo simulation that as particle size increases, diffuse reflectance increases and the first minimum in the frequency-dependent DOP shifts to lower frequencies, and it verifies the intensity and DOP trends experimentally for four gelatin phantoms containing polypropylene particles of 115–280 µm diameter. It further shows that burned porcine skin exhibits higher DOP and higher diffuse intensity than healthy skin, which the authors interpret as a decrease in average scatterer size from destruction of hair follicles and sweat glands, together with reduced water absorption.

Load-bearing premise

The interpretation of measured DOP and intensity contrast as due to internal Mie scattering assumes that the phantom and ex vivo skin surfaces are optically flat and smooth, so that depolarization from surface roughness is negligible.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim holds, a single measurement of degree of polarization at a diffuse backscattering angle can recover scatterer size and concentration information from the spectral location and depth of the DOP minimum.
  • The Lu-Chipman decomposition implies that for spherical scatterers in an absorbing medium, full Mueller matrix characterization is redundant; one linear or circular polarization measurement suffices.
  • DOP is far less sensitive to system misalignment than absolute diffuse intensity, so it is the more reliable candidate diagnostic metric.
  • The porcine burn result suggests the technique can distinguish burned from healthy tissue ex vivo, with the DOP contrast attributed to destruction of large skin structures.
  • Extending bandwidth from roughly 1.5 THz to 8 THz would allow the DOP minimum to be resolved for smaller particle sizes, improving sensitivity to early disease changes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The surface-flatness assumption is likely the main obstacle to clinical translation: real skin is rough, and the paper's own earlier speckle work shows surface roughness depolarizes THz light, so separating surface and bulk depolarization will be necessary before the Mie-scattering interpretation can be applied in vivo.
  • The burn data show DOP and intensity both increasing, whereas the simulation ties larger DOP to smaller scatterers with lower reflectance; the authors' explanation is reduced water absorption in the burn, which suggests that joint estimation of absorption and scattering is required to interpret clinical signals unambiguously.
  • The same approach could be tested on other conditions that change sub-millimeter tissue structure, such as fibrosis, edema, or tumor margins, provided the suspected scatterer sizes fall in the Mie regime for the THz bandwidth used.
  • A direct experimental falsification would be to fabricate phantoms with fixed particle size and deliberately varied surface roughness; if DOP changes as much from roughness as from a 115-to-280 µm particle size change, the diagnostic interpretation would need revision.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents a Monte Carlo model, based on the authors' earlier polarized-light transport code, for Mie scattering of broadband terahertz light by spherical particles embedded in an absorbing medium, and compares the simulated diffuse reflectance and degree of polarization (DOP) with experiments on gelatin phantoms containing polypropylene particles of four sizes. It then applies the same framework to interpret a single ex vivo porcine burn measurement, claiming that the observed DOP and intensity contrasts between burned and healthy skin are consistent with a burn-induced decrease in scatterer size. The central claim is that polarimetric terahertz imaging can detect structural changes due to disease processes such as tumor budding and burn injury.

Significance. If the claimed verification were established, the paper would provide a useful mechanistic basis for interpreting THz polarimetric contrast in terms of scatterer size and density, which is currently lacking in the THz biophotonics literature. The study is commendable for using a forward Monte Carlo model with independently measured dielectric properties, for explicitly measuring the phantom particle distributions after fabrication, and for acknowledging several limitations of the experimental system. The Mueller-matrix decomposition argument that a single polarization measurement may suffice under the assumed symmetry is also of interest. However, the experimental verification is only partial: the two smallest particle phantoms behave opposite to the model prediction in the usable band, and the burn experiment is a single sample. The significance of the work therefore rests more on its conceptual demonstration than on a validated quantitative model.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3.3, Fig. 8] The claimed 'agreement with Monte Carlo simulation results' (Abstract) is not supported for Phantoms A and B: over the usable 0.2–0.8 THz band, the measured DOP for these two smallest-particle phantoms shows the opposite trend to the simulation. The paper attributes this to 'SNR and bandwidth limitations,' but insufficient bandwidth or SNR would add noise or flatten the DOP curve, not reverse its spectral slope. This is a load-bearing discrepancy because the small-particle regime (115–130 µm) is exactly the regime relevant to tumor budding and early structural lesions, which the burn interpretation in §3.4 relies on.
  2. [§3.4] The interpretation of the porcine burn data is built on the same simulation that is contradicted by Phantoms A and B. The paper states that 'healthy tissue DOP drops much faster than the burn DOP from 0.2-0.8 THz' and concludes from the simulation that this indicates 'a decrease in the size of scatterers within the burn tissue compared to healthy tissue.' Since the small-particle DOP prediction is not experimentally verified, this inference has no quantitative basis. Moreover, the burn measurement is a single sample with no replicate, no error bars, and no independent measure of water content or surface roughness, both of which are acknowledged confounds in the Discussion.
  3. [§3.3, §2.1] The diffuse-intensity comparison between simulation and experiment is not quantitative: the simulation collects photons over all backscattered angles, whereas the experimental detection cone is only 20 degrees, as the paper itself states in §3.3. Consequently, the claimed agreement for intensity is limited to a shared qualitative trend (higher intensity at lower frequencies and with larger particles). The paper should either restrict the verification claims to the DOP, or provide an angularly integrated experimental measure that can be compared with the simulation.
  4. [§2.2, Table 1] The conversion from surface density (particles/mm²) to volume density (mm⁻³) is described as dividing by 'the summation of the depth of field of the microscope and twice the particle diameter size,' but no explicit formula or justification is given. This conversion directly determines the simulated µs and µa through Eqs. (1)–(2), and a mis-specified conversion would change the simulation output. The authors should state the depth-of-field value and the exact formula, and examine how sensitive the DOP predictions are to this conversion.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that experimental phantom results 'showed contrast ... in agreement with Monte Carlo simulation results,' which is contradicted by the later admission in §3.3 that Phantoms A and B have 'an opposite trend than expected.' The abstract should be qualified to reflect the partial agreement.
  2. [§3.3, Fig. 8] The DOP curves are stated to be averaged over 100 pixels, but no error bars, standard deviations, or confidence intervals are shown. Given the large spatial variability visible in the burn maps, the reader cannot assess whether the phantom DOP differences are statistically significant.
  3. [§2.1, Eq. (10)] The Stokes parameters are defined using ensemble averages, but in practice the averages are taken over a finite number of pixels. For low-intensity pixels, the DOP computed from Eq. (5) will be biased upward by noise in I, Q, and U; the paper does not address this noise bias in the DOP estimation.
  4. [§4, Discussion] The assumption that 'the surface of the phantom and the ex vivo skin is optically flat and smooth' is a strong simplification that the paper only mentions in the last paragraph of the Discussion. Given that surface roughness depolarization is a known effect (Ref. 27), this assumption should be elevated to a stated limitation in the Abstract or Results, and its potential impact on the DOP contrast should be discussed more prominently.
  5. [§5, Conclusion] There is a typo: 'Muleler matrices' should read 'Mueller matrices.'
  6. [References] The Monte Carlo code (Ref. 14) originates from the same research group, and the phantom inputs are measured from the same phantoms used for verification. While this is not circularity (the model is a forward calculation), the paper should explicitly acknowledge that the simulation has not been independently validated by another group, to avoid the impression of self-verification.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: forward Monte Carlo model is tested against independently characterized phantoms, not fitted to the target signal.

full rationale

The central derivation chain is a forward Monte Carlo simulation. Mie theory (Eqs. 1-4) is combined with measured refractive indices (Sec. 2.2) and independently measured phantom particle sizes and volume densities (Sec. 3.1, Table 1) to produce Stokes and Mueller matrix outputs. The experimental DOP and diffuse intensity from the same phantoms are then compared in Sec. 3.3 (Fig. 8). No parameter is fitted to the DOP or intensity that is later called a prediction; the model inputs (particle size, density, refractive index) are determined by microscopy and THz dielectric measurements, not by matching the polarimetric output. Therefore the phantom comparison is a genuine, falsifiable test rather than a construction. Indeed, Phantoms A and B are reported to show 'an opposite trend than expected' from the simulation, which confirms that the agreement is not forced by definition. The Monte Carlo code is cited from the authors' prior work (ref. 14), but the present paper provides the governing equations and cites external bases (Ramella-Roman et al., Yang et al.); the code is used as a transparent forward tool, not as an unexamined uniqueness theorem. The Discussion's statement that 'Xu and Arbab showed... that the depth of the minima in DOP curves is a function of the concentration' is a self-citation, but it is peripheral to the main experimental contrast and does not carry the central claim. The flat-surface assumption is a stated limitation that affects interpretation but is not a circular reduction. Overall, the derivation is self-contained against external Mie theory and measured material parameters, and no load-bearing step reduces to its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim relies on the validity of the prior Monte Carlo model, the measured phantom parameters, and the flat-surface assumption. The ImageJ threshold and volume-density conversion are user choices that affect the simulation inputs.

free parameters (2)
  • ImageJ particle detection threshold = 75 µm
    Set in Section 3.1 to discard artifacts and small particles; influences the average particle size and density used in the simulation.
  • Surface-to-volume density conversion = 1/(depth of field + 2×diameter)
    Used in Section 3.1 to derive volume density from measured surface density; an assumption about the sampled volume.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Mie scattering theory for spherical particles in an absorbing host medium
    The Mie coefficients and scattering parameters (Eqs. 1-2) follow Yang et al. (ref 40); this is the physical foundation of the simulation.
  • domain assumption The polarized light Monte Carlo code of Xu and Arbab (ref 14) correctly models polarized light transport in absorbing media
    The paper relies on this code without providing its validation; it is the authors' own prior work, a modification of Ramella-Roman et al. (ref 39).
  • domain assumption Sample surfaces are optically flat and smooth
    Stated in the Discussion: 'in this work we assumed that the surface of the phantom and the ex vivo skin is optically flat and smooth.' Critical because surface roughness can depolarize THz light independently of internal Mie scattering.
  • domain assumption Particles are spherical with a single average size
    The simulation uses average particle diameters from microscopy; actual phantoms contain a distribution and clumps, which the model does not capture.
  • standard math Lu-Chipman decomposition is applicable to the simulated Mueller matrices
    Used to decompose Mueller matrices into attenuator, retarder, and depolarizer components (Eqs. 8-9).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Mie scattering due to tissue structures in the terahertz regime: Experimental and Monte Carlo verification using diffused polarimetric imaging in highly attenuating tissue phantoms." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JCZJLPHE

@misc{pith2026250100630,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Mie scattering due to tissue structures in the terahertz regime: Experimental and Monte Carlo verification using diffused polarimetric imaging in highly attenuating tissue phantoms},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JCZJLPHE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.00630}
}
read the original abstract

Significance: Changes in the structure of tissue occur in many disease processes, such as the boundaries of cancerous tumors and burn injuries. Spectroscopic and polarimetric alterations of terahertz light caused by Mie scattering patterns has the potential to be a diagnostic marker. Aim: We present an analysis of Monte Carlo simulation of Mie scattering of polarized terahertz light from cancerous tumor budding, compare the simulation to experimental results obtained in phantom models, and present an analysis of a polarization-sensitive terahertz scan of an ex vivo porcine burn injury. Approach: Using a Monte Carlo simulation, we modeled the changes in diffuse intensity and degree of polarization of broadband off-specular terahertz light due to scattering particles in highly attenuating tissue. We extracted the Mueller matrix of the tissue using this model and analyzed the Lu-Chipman product decomposition matrices. We compared this model to experimental data from four phantoms consisting of polypropylene particles of varying sizes embedded in gelatin. Finally, we induced a full-thickness burn injury in ex vivo porcine skin samples and compared experimental data from burned and healthy regions of the tissue. Results: Simulation revealed contrast in the Stokes vectors and Mueller Matrix elements for varying scattering particle sizes. Experimental phantom results showed contrast between different sizes of scattering particles in degree of polarization and diffuse intensity in agreement with Monte Carlo simulation results. Finally, we demonstrated a similar diffused imaging signal contrast between burned and healthy regions of ex vivo porcine skin. Conclusion: Polarimetric terahertz imaging has the potential to detect structural changes due to biological disease processes.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Leitenstorfer, A

    A. Leitenstorfer, A. S. Moskalenko, T. Kampfrath, et al. , ``The 2023 terahertz science and technology roadmap,'' Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 56 (22), 223001 (2023)

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    X. Chen, H. Lindley-Hatcher, R. I. Stantchev, et al. , ``Terahertz ( TH z) biophotonics technology: Instrumentation, techniques, and biomedical applications,'' Chem. Phys. Rev. 3 (1), 011311 (2022)

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    P. C. Ashworth, E. Pickwell-MacPherson, E. Provenzano, et al. , ``Terahertz pulsed spectroscopy of freshly excised human breast cancer,'' Optics Express 17 , 12444--12454 (2009). Publisher: Optica Publishing Group

    work page 2009

  4. [4]

    El-Shenawee, N

    M. El-Shenawee, N. Vohra, T. Bowman, et al. , ``Cancer detection in excised breast tumors using terahertz imaging and spectroscopy,'' Biomedical Spectroscopy and Imaging 8 , 1--9 (2019)

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    B. Fan, V. A. Neel, and A. N. Yaroslavsky, ``Multimodal imaging for nonmelanoma skin cancer margin delineation,'' Lasers in Surgery and Medicine 49 (3), 319--326 (2017). \_eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/lsm.22552

    work page doi:10.1002/lsm.22552 2017

  6. [6]

    Y. C. Sim, J. Y. Park, K.-M. Ahn, et al. , ``Terahertz imaging of excised oral cancer at frozen temperature,'' Biomedical Optics Express 4 , 1413--1421 (2013). Publisher: Optica Publishing Group

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    M. E. Khani, O. B. Osman, Z. B. Harris, et al. , `` Accurate and early prediction of the wound healing outcome of burn injuries using the wavelet Shannon entropy of terahertz time-domain waveforms ,'' Journal of Biomedical Optics 27 (11), 116001 (2022)

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    O. B. Osman, Z. B. Harris, M. E. Khani, et al. , ``Deep neural network classification of in vivo burn injuries with different etiologies using terahertz time-domain spectral imaging,'' Biomed. Opt. Express 13 , 1855--1868 (2022). Publisher: Optica Publishing Group

    work page 2022

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    M. E. Khani, Z. B. Harris, O. B. Osman, et al. , ``Triage of in vivo burn injuries and prediction of wound healing outcome using neural networks and modeling of the terahertz permittivity based on the double debye dielectric parameters,'' Biomedical Optics Express 14 , 918--931 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    Lugli, R

    A. Lugli, R. Kirsch, Y. Ajioka, et al. , ``Recommendations for reporting tumor budding in colorectal cancer based on the International Tumor Budding Consensus Conference ( ITBCC ) 2016,'' Modern Pathology 30 , 1299--1311 (2017)

    2017

  3. [11]

    Venkatesh and T

    D. Venkatesh and T. Smitha, ``Cell budding,'' Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology : JOMFP 23 (3), 330--332 (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    Reggiani Bonetti, V

    L. Reggiani Bonetti, V. Barresi, S. Bettelli, et al. , ``Poorly differentiated clusters ( PDC ) in colorectal cancer: what is and ought to be known,'' Diagnostic Pathology 11 , 31 (2016)

    2016

  5. [13]

    Lugli, I

    A. Lugli, I. Zlobec, M. D. Berger, et al. , ``Tumour budding in solid cancers,'' Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology 18 (2), 101--115 (2021)

    2021

  6. [14]

    Xu and M

    K. Xu and M. H. Arbab, ``Terahertz polarimetric imaging of biological tissue: Monte carlo modeling of signal contrast mechanisms due to mie scattering,'' Biomed. Opt. Express 15 , 2328--2342 (2024)

    2024

  7. [15]

    Garcia-Uribe, J

    A. Garcia-Uribe, J. Zou, M. Duvic, et al. , ``In vivo diagnosis of melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer using oblique incidence diffuse reflectance spectrometry,'' Cancer Research 72 (11), 2738--2745 (2012)

    2012

  8. [16]

    Nishizawa and T

    N. Nishizawa and T. Kuchimaru, ``Depth estimation of tumor invasion in early gastric cancer using scattering of circularly polarized light: Monte Carlo Simulation study,'' Journal of Biophotonics 15 (10), e202200062 (2022). \_eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10....

    2022 doi

  9. [17]

    M. L. Altoe, K. Kalinsky, A. Marone, et al. , ``Changes in diffuse optical tomography images during early stages of neoadjuvant chemotherapy correlate with tumor response in different breast cancer subtypes,'' Clinical Cancer Research 27 (7), 1949--1957 (2021)

    2021

  10. [18]

    M. D. Keller, S. K. Majumder, M. C. Kelley, et al. , ``Autofluorescence and diffuse reflectance spectroscopy and spectral imaging for breast surgical margin analysis,'' Lasers in Surgery and Medicine 42 (1), 15--23 (2010)

    2010

  11. [19]

    O. M. A’Amar, L. Liou, E. Rodriguez-Diaz, et al. , ``Comparison of elastic scattering spectroscopy with histology in ex vivo prostate glands: potential application for optically guided biopsy and directed treatment,'' Lasers in Medical Science 28 (5), 1323--1329 (2013)

    2013

  12. [20]

    Arifler, C

    D. Arifler, C. MacAulay, M. Follen, et al. , ``Spatially resolved reflectance spectroscopy for diagnosis of cervical precancer: Monte carlo modeling and comparison to clinical measurements,'' Journal of Biomedical Optics 11 (6), 064027 (2006)

    2006

  13. [21]

    Z. A. Steelman, D. S. Ho, K. K. Chu, et al. , ``Light-scattering methods for tissue diagnosis,'' Optica 6 (4), 479--489 (2019)

    2019

  14. [22]

    Rodriguez-Diaz, Q

    E. Rodriguez-Diaz, Q. Huang, S. R. Cerda, et al. , ``Endoscopic histological assessment of colonic polyps by using elastic scattering spectroscopy,'' Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 81 (3), 539--547 (2015). doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.07.012

    2015 doi

  15. [23]

    R. M. Trout, E. Gnanatheepam, A. Gado, et al. , ``Polarization enhanced laparoscope for improved visualization of tissue structural changes associated with peritoneal cancer metastasis,'' Biomedical Optics Express 13 , 571 (2022)

    2022

  16. [24]

    Doradla, K

    P. Doradla, K. Alavi, C. S. Joseph, et al. , ``Detection of colon cancer by continuous-wave terahertz polarization imaging technique,'' Journal of Biomedical Optics 18 , 090504 (2013). Publisher: SPIE

    2013

  17. [25]

    Gurjar, K

    N. Gurjar, K. Bailey, and M. O. El-Shenawee, ``Polarimetry terahertz imaging of human breast cancer surgical specimens,'' Journal of Medical Imaging 11 , 065503 (2024). Publisher: SPIE

    2024

  18. [26]

    X. Chen, E. P. J. Parrott, Z. Huang, et al. , ``Robust and accurate terahertz time-domain spectroscopic ellipsometry,'' Photon. Res. 6 , 768--775 (2018)

    2018

  19. [27]

    K. Xu, Z. B. Harris, and M. H. Arbab, ``Polarimetric imaging of back-scattered terahertz speckle fields using a portable scanner,'' Opt. Express 31 , 11308--11319 (2023)

    2023

  20. [28]

    Z. B. Harris, K. Xu, and M. H. Arbab, ``A handheld polarimetric imaging device and calibration technique for accurate mapping of terahertz stokes vectors,'' Scientific Reports 14 (1), 17714 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    Castro-Camus, J

    E. Castro-Camus, J. Lloyd-Hughes, M. Johnston, et al. , ``Polarization-sensitive terahertz detection by multicontact photoconductive receivers,'' Applied Physics Letters 86 (25) (2005)

    2005

  22. [30]

    C. M. Morris, R. V. Aguilar, A. V. Stier, et al. , ``Polarization modulation time-domain terahertz polarimetry,'' Optics express 20 (11), 12303--12317 (2012)

    2012

  23. [31]

    D. S. Bulgarevich, M. Watanabe, M. Shiwa, et al. , ``A polarization-sensitive 4-contact detector for terahertz time-domain spectroscopy,'' Optics express 22 (9), 10332--10340 (2014)

    2014

  24. [32]

    Nourinovin, M

    S. Nourinovin, M. M. Rahman, M. P. Philpott, et al. , ``Terahertz characterization of ordinary and aggressive types of oral squamous cell carcinoma as a function of cancer stage and treatment efficiency,'' IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement 72 , 1--9 (2023)

    2023

  25. [33]

    Y. B. Ji, J. M. Kim, Y. H. Lee, et al. , ``Investigation of keratinizing squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue using terahertz reflection imaging,'' Journal of Infrared, Millimeter, and Terahertz Waves 40 (2), 247--256 (2019)

    2019

  26. [34]

    C. A. Schneider, W. S. Rasband, and K. W. Eliceiri, ``Nih image to imagej: 25 years of image analysis,'' Nature Methods 9 (7), 671--675 (2012)

    2012

  27. [35]

    Boxberg, M

    M. Boxberg, M. Jesinghaus, C. Dorfner, et al. , ``Tumour budding activity and cell nest size determine patient outcome in oral squamous cell carcinoma: proposal for an adjusted grading system,'' Histopathology 70 (7), 1125--1137 (2017)

    2017

  28. [36]

    Z. B. Harris and M. H. Arbab, ``Terahertz phasr scanner with 2 khz, 100 ps time-domain trace acquisition rate and an extended field-of-view based on a heliostat design,'' IEEE Transactions on Terahertz Science and Technology 12 , 619--632 (2022)

    2022

  29. [37]

    Chang, X

    T. Chang, X. Zhang, Q. Guo, et al. , ``Terahertz Dielectric Spectroscopy Based Thermal Aging Analysis of Polypropylene ,'' IEEE Transactions on Terahertz Science and Technology 10 , 363--369 (2020). Conference Name: IEEE Transactions on Terahertz Science and Technology

    2020

  30. [38]

    Jin, G.-J

    Y.-S. Jin, G.-J. Kim, and S.-G. Jeon, ``Terahertz Dielectric Properties of Polymers ,'' Journal of the Korean Physical Society 49 , 513--517 (2006)

    2006

  31. [39]

    J. C. Ramella-Roman, S. A. Prahl, and S. L. Jacques, ``Three Monte Carlo programs of polarized light transport into scattering media: part I ,'' Optics Express 13 , 4420--4438 (2005). Publisher: Optica Publishing Group

    2005

  32. [40]

    Yang, B.-C

    P. Yang, B.-C. Gao, W. J. Wiscombe, et al. , ``Inherent and apparent scattering properties of coated or uncoated spheres embedded in an absorbing host medium,'' Applied Optics 41 , 2740--2759 (2002). Publisher: Optica Publishing Group

    2002

  33. [41]

    Lu and R

    S.-Y. Lu and R. A. Chipman, ``Interpretation of Mueller matrices based on polar decomposition,'' JOSA A 13 , 1106--1113 (1996). Publisher: Optica Publishing Group

    1996

  34. [42]

    K. Xu, M. Liu, and M. H. Arbab, ``Broadband terahertz time-domain polarimetry based on air plasma filament emissions and spinning electro-optic sampling in GaP ,'' Applied Physics Letters 120 , 181107 (2022)

    2022

  35. [43]

    Ebrahimkhani and M

    M. Ebrahimkhani and M. H. Arbab, ``Extraction of thz absorption signatures obscured by rough surface scattering using discrete wavelet transform,'' in 2018 43rd International Conference on Infrared, Millimeter, and Terahertz Waves (IRMMW-THz) , 1--2 (2018)

    2018

  36. [44]

    M. E. Khani and M. H. Arbab, ``Translation-invariant zero-phase wavelet methods for feature extraction in terahertz time-domain spectroscopy,'' Sensors 22 (6) (2022)

    2022

  37. [45]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION blank.sep after.quote 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry output.state after.quoted.block = 'skip 'add.period if write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip output.state after.quote = after.quoted.blo...

Pith tools

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