## 3 Results
### Phantom Experimental Results
The mean difference and mean percentage change of the (\(\mu_{a}\), \(\mu_{s}\)') recovered from the true (\(\mu_{a}\), \(\mu_{s}\)') over all wavelengths have been summarized in Tables 4 and 5, respectively, for phantoms A and B using both hybrid DOI and conventional topographic DOI techniques. Figure 11: Hyperspectral substrate (row 1) and inclusion \(\mu_{a}\) (row 2) at wavelengths 650 nm to 1000 nm for phantoms A and B.  
Figure 12: Hyperspectral substrate (row 1) and inclusion \(\mu_{s}\)’ (row 2) at wavelengths 650 nm to 1000 nm for phantoms A and B. As shown in Figures 11 and 12 and Tables 4 and 5, both hybrid DOI and topographic DOI techniques recover the broadband optical properties (\(\mu_{a}\), \(\mu_{s}\)') for the phantom substrate with a low mean percentage difference less than 6% from true values over all wavelengths in all measured scenarios. This trend in the experimental agrees with the simulated scenarios in Table 3, where the hybrid DOI technique recovered broadband normal optical properties with a mean accuracy of less than 5% over all 71 wavelengths. For the broadband \(\mu_{a}\) recovery of the inclusion spectra in the phantoms, the hybrid DOI technique demonstrates a lower mean percent difference from true \(\mu_{a}\) versus the conventional topographic DOI for both shallow and deep ends of phantoms A and B. Therefore, the experimental results also agree with the simulated trends by demonstrating a mean accuracy over all wavelengths for optical \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Depths** & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Phantom A—Inclusion**} \\ \hline \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Hybrid DOI**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Topographic DOI**} \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{**Wavelengths (mm\({}^{-1}\))**} & **Mean Difference from True Over all** & **Mean\% Change from True Over all** & **Mean Difference from True Over all** & **Mean\% Change from True Over all** & **from True Over all** \\  & **Wavelengths (mm\({}^{-1}\))** & **Wavelengths (\%)** & **Wavelengths (\%)** & **Wavelengths (mm\({}^{-1}\))** & **Wave lengths (\%)** \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{**Wavelengths (mm\({}^{-1}\))**} & **\(\mu_{a}\)** & \(\mu_{a}\)** & \(\mu_{s}\)’ & \(\mu_{a}\)** & \(\mu_{s}\)’ & \(\mu_{a}\) & \(\mu_{s}\)’ \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-7}  & **\(4.0\times 10^{-4}\)** & **0.03** & **3.65** & **4.99** & \(3.3\times 10^{-3}\) & **0.03** & **25.19** & **4.89** \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-7}
**7** & **\(1.0\times 10^{-3}\)** & **0.09** & **8.37** & **15.34** & \(5.1\times 10^{-3}\) & **0.03** & **38.43** & **3.52** \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-7}  & **\multicolumn{6}{c}{**Phantom A—Substrate**} \\ \hline \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Hybrid DOI**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Topographic DOI**} \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{**Wavelengths (mm\({}^{-1}\))**} & **Mean difference from true over all** & **Mean\% change from true over all** & **Mean\% change from true over all** & **true over all** \\  & **wavelengths (mm\({}^{-1}\))** & **wavelengths (\%)** & **wavelengths (mm\({}^{-1}\))** & **wavelengths (\%)** \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{**Wavelengths (mm\({}^{-1}\))**} & **\(\mu_{a}\)** & \(\mu_{s}\)’ & \(\mu_{a}\)** & \(\mu_{s}\)’ & \(\mu_{a}\)** & \(\mu_{s}\)’ \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-7}
**2** & **\(4.6\times 10^{-5}\)** & **0.008** & **1.01** & **0.78** & **3.31** \(\times 10^{-5}\) & **0.0018** & **0.75** & **0.32** \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-7}
**7** & **\(8.1\times 10^{-5}\)** & **0.010** & **1.78** & **1.32** & **3.32** \(\times 10^{-5}\) & **0.002** & **0.76** & **0.31** \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Mean difference and mean percentage change of recovered (\(\mu_{a}\), \(\mu_{s}\)’) from true (\(\mu_{a}\), \(\mu_{s}\)’) over all wavelengths for phantom A.