Peripheral refraction is thought to play an important role in the onset and progression of myopia, highlighting the need for reliable methods to quantify peripheral optical aberrations in the eye. We present a mechanically scanning Hartmann–Shack system and validates it using a model eye. The system coordinates the mirror rotation and translation with synchronous motion of the wavefront sensor to perform peripheral aberration measurements. For a 6-mm entrance pupil, central field refractive errors from −6 to +6 D were measured, and horizontal meridian peripheral aberrations were acquired over a 0- to 30-deg field of view in 2.5-deg steps. The experimental measurements were compared with corresponding Zemax-based simulations. Five repeated measurements showed good agreement with the simulated central field defocus, with a linear fit slope close to 1. In off-axis fields, the experimental and simulated results demonstrated reliable measurement performance, with spherical equivalent differences below 0.10 D and a maximum astigmatic component J0 difference of 0.19 D. These results demonstrate the accuracy and repeatability of the proposed mechanically scanning approach under model eye conditions and support its further development as a platform for future peripheral aberration studies.
Yongji Liu, Xinyu Du, Yanzhe Fan et al.· Optical Engineering: The Jou...· 0 citations
Purpose To evaluate the guideline knowledge alignment of two large language models (LLMs), GPT‐5.5 Instant and DeepSeek‐V4, and to determine their preclinical reliability as reference tools in refractive surgery. Methods Using the 38 evidence‐based recommendations of the international keratorefractive lenticule extraction (KLEx) guidelines as the gold standard, both LLMs were evaluated in their default configurations. Two ophthalmologists independently assessed the clinical safety and medical accuracy of the model responses using a 5‐point Likert scale (1–5 points). Agreement between each model’s recommendation strength and the guideline was quantified by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), structural reliability by the DISCERN scale, and readability by the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) and Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) indices. Results Likert ratings did not differ between GPT‐5.5 Instant (4.96 ± 0.206) and DeepSeek‐V4 (4.89 ± 0.385; p = 0.134). Across 114 independent generations, the ICC for agreement with the guideline was 0.884 (95% CI, 0.836–0.918) for GPT‐5.5 Instant and 0.739 (0.640–0.813) for DeepSeek‐V4 (both p < 0.001). DISCERN scores were 70.18 ± 5.16 and 68.05 ± 5.41 (p = 0.085); FRE, 9.93 ± 8.33 and 3.74 ± 5.24 (p < 0.001); and FKGL, 16.07 ± 2.21 and 18.95 ± 1.96 (p < 0.001). Conclusion Both models aligned closely with the guidelines, with significant concordance in GRADE‐based recommendation strength. They may serve as preclinical reference tools in refractive surgery but not as a substitute for specialist judgment.
Hong-Xia Lu, Yan Huo, Rui-Si Xie et al.· Journal of Ophthalmology· 0 citations
