Expand this Topic clickable element to expand a topic
Skip to content
Optica Publishing Group

Information-based analysis of simple incoherent imaging systems

Open Access Open Access

Abstract

We present an information-based analysis of three candidate imagers: a conventional lens system, a cubic phase mask system, and a random phase mask system. For source volumes comprising relatively few equal-intensity point sources we compare both the axial and lateral information content of detector intensity measurements. We include the effect of additive white Gaussian noise. Single and distributed aperture imaging is studied. A single detector in each of two apertures using conventional lenses can yield 36% of the available scene information when the source volume contains only single point source. The addition of cubic phase masks yields nearly 74% of the scene information. An identical configuration using random phase masks offers the best performance with 89% scene information available in the detector intensity measurements.

©2003 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article
More Like This
Fisher-information-based analysis of a phase-diversity-speckle imaging system

Sudhakar Prasad
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 21(11) 2073-2088 (2004)

Focus Issue: Integrated Computational Imaging Systems

Joseph N. Mait
Opt. Express 11(18) 2091-2092 (2003)

Task-specific information for imaging system analysis

Mark A. Neifeld, Amit Ashok, and Pawan K. Baheti
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 24(12) B25-B41 (2007)

Cited By

Optica participates in Crossref's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from Optica Publishing Group journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (6)

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. Imaging system layout: (a) Single aperture system (b) Distributed aperture system.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. (a) Cubic phase profile and (b) Random phase profile.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3. Single detector imager (a) Total/axial/lateral IMI ratio (b) Total IMI ratio for multiple point sources with (D=3cm) (c) Optimal detector size and (d) Optimal detector position.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 4. Detector intensity maps (a), (b) and (c) and detector intensity log-pdf (d), (e) and (f) for conventional lens, cubic phase mask and random phase imagers respectively with D=3cm.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 5. Single aperture two detector imager (a) Total/axial/lateral IMI ratio (b) Total IMI ratio for multiple point sources with (D=3cm) (c) Optimal detector sizes and (d) Optimal detector positions.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 6. Distributed aperture two detector imager (a) Total/axial/lateral IMI ratio for single point source (b) Total IMI ratio for multiple point sources (D=3cm) (c) Optimal detector sizes and (d) Optimal detector positions (θ=90°).

Tables (1)

Tables Icon

Table 1. Total/axial/lateral IMI ratio of three imagers for various angles (D=3cm).

Select as filters


Select Topics Cancel
© Copyright 2024 | Optica Publishing Group. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies.