Correction: Mori et al. High-Dynamic-Range Absorption Spectroscopy by Generating a Wide Path-Length Distribution with Scatterers. Photonics 2024, 11, 556

Error in Figure

In the original publication [1], there were two mistakes in Figure 3. The notation µ_a ln(10) in the legend and caption of Figure 3b was incorrect. The text in the legend of Figure 3c was missing. The corrected Figure 3 with the correct legend and caption appears below.

Error in Table

In the original publication, there was a mistake in Table 1 as published. The absorption coefficient µ_a is calculated using the natural logarithm; however, this table listed a value, µ_a10, which was calculated using the common logarithm. In the simulations, µ_a10 was used as the input, and the program internally converted it to µ_a by multiplying by ln(10). Therefore, the simulations used the correct values. The corrected

Table 1. Input parameters for Monte Carlo simulations. MC simulations were conducted under a total of 4680 conditions, involving combinations of 130 values of µ_a and 36 values of λ. β is ln(10). The simulations utilized three input parameters, µ_a, µ_s, and g, with µ_s and g being dependent on λ.

Input Parameter	Values
µa [cm−1]	Ranges from 0.0 to 0.09β in increments of 0.01β and from 0.1β to 12.0β in increments of 0.1β
λ [nm]	Ranges from 350 to 700 in increments of 10 and includes 426
µs [cm−1] and g	Calculated for each λ based on Mie scattering theory

appears below.

Text Correction

A correction has been made to Appendix A, second paragraph:

In this study, since the imaginary part of the dye solution’s refractive index, κ, is sufficiently small (for the high absorption peak at λ = 426 nm, where µ_a < 28 cm⁻¹, resulting in κ = µ_a λ/4π < 9.492 × 10⁻⁵), the scattering coefficient µs and the anisotropy factor g were calculated using conventional Mie theory. However, in cases where κ is large, calculations should be conducted using a modified Mie theory that accounts for the absorption properties of the medium [47,48].

The authors state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.