## 3 Results and Discussion  
To compare the MMT and MMPD parameters more comprehensively, in the following sections we analyze the three main polarization properties (diattenuation, retardance, and depolarization) of both the transmission imaging results of thin tissue samples, and backscattering imaging results of bulk tissue samples. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Type**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Sample Description**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Experimental Setup**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Total**} \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{4-7}  & **Sample** & **Thickness (\(\mu\)m)** & **Number** & **Light Source** & \(\lambda\) (nm)** & **Power (W)** & **Geometry** & \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Thin} & colorectal & 12 & 14 & LED & 633 & 1 & \\  & ITB & 12 & 14 & LED & 633 & 1 & \\  & liver & 12 & 6 & LED & 633 & 1 & \\  & CD & 12 & 10 & LED & 633 & 1 & Forward & 86 \\  & bladder & 12 & 14 & LED & 633 & 1 & \\  & breast & 12 & 14 & LED & 633 & 1 & \\  & adenoma & 12 & 14 & LED & 633 & 1 & \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Bulk} & breast & - & 7 & LED & 633 & 1 & \\  & rat-skin & - & 23 & LED & 633 & 1 & \\  & porcine-intestine & - & 8 & LED & 633 & 1 & Backward & 63 \\  & porcine-stomach & - & 16 & LED & 633 & 1 & \\  & porcine-liver & - & 9 & LED & 633 & 1 & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Description of the tissue samples (\(n=149\)) and the experimental setup of the Mueller matrix polarimetry systems. Quantitative Comparison of Diattenuation Related MMPD and MMT Parameters for Transmission Imaging of Thin Tissue Samples  
We measured all seven different kinds of thin pathological tissue slices (86 in total) using the forward transmission Mueller matrix microscope. Then, for each kind of tissue sample, we calculated the diattenuation related MMT and MMPD parameters according to Equations (2), (9) and (17). Specifically, to find out whether the modified MMT parameters can be used to accurately obtain the structural properties of tissue samples, the quantitative analyses were conducted to show the correlations and differences between the MMT and the corresponding MMPD parameters. The correlation coefficient \(R^{2}\) and statistical analysis \(p\) values of each kind of thin tissue slice samples are presented in Table 2. The comparison of the MMPD and MMT diattenuation parameters was performed in two groups: (\(D\), \(t_{1213}\)) and (\(D\), \(t_{121314}\)). As we can see from Table 2, for the correlation analysis, compared with the group of (\(D\), \(t_{1213}\)), the group (\(D\), \(t_{121314}\)), for each kind of sample has a higher correlation coefficient value of 1. More thorough and intuitive comparisons are illustrated in Figure 1a, c by plotting out all the sample data, which confirm that the modified MMT diattenuation parameter \(t_{121314}\) has a good accordance with the MMPD parameter \(D\) in the transmission measurement. On the other hand, as can be noticed from Table 2 and Figure 1b, the ITB tissue samples show statistically significant differences, with \(p<0.01\) between the parameters \(D\) and \(t_{1213}\). While for the modified parameter \(t_{121314}\), the \(p\)-values of all kinds of tissue samples are above 0.05, meaning that the modified MMT parameter \(t_{121314}\) can be used as a precise indicator for the diattenuation property of thin tissue samples. Quantitative Comparison of Diattenuation Related MMPD and MMT Parameters for Backscattering Imaging of Bulk Tissue Samples  
To study the relationship between the diattenuation related MMPD and MMT parameters for backscattering polarimetric measurement, we prepared five different kinds of bulk tissue samples (63 in total) to attain their backscattering Mueller matrix data. Then, for each kind of tissue sample, we also calculated the diattenuation-related parameters in Section 3.1 for the correlation and statistical analysis whose results are shown in Table 3 and Figure 2.