Table 3. Comparison of methods used and errors (%) in quantified optical properties of two-layered tissue models with the thickness of the top layer known.
| Source of data | Inverse model | Reflectance source | Noise level (%) | µa1 | µs1' | µa2 | µs2' |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This study | Iterative based on scaling MC | Spatially-resolved reflectance | 5 | 6.0 | 4.3 | 4.7 | 1.4 |
| Ref [28] | Two-layered diffusion equation | Spatially-resolved reflectance | 1 | <10 | <5 | <30 | 12–20 |
| Ref [27] | Two-layered diffusion equation | Spatially-resolved reflectance | 2 | 14.5 | 8.1 | 29.3 | 9.1 |
| Ref [25] | Planar photon density wave model | Spatially-modulated reflectance imaging | Phantom data | 17.2 | 1.2 | 99.5 | 21.2a |
aµs2' stays within 5% of initial guess.