MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Extended-object reconstruction in adaptive-optics imaging: the multiresolution approach

2013· article· en· W3101196487 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSpringer Link (Chiba Institute of Technology) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice National d'études et de Recherches AérospatialesU.S. Air ForceMinisterio de Ciencia y TecnologíaUniversitat Autònoma de BarcelonaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsDeconvolutionArtificial intelligenceBlind deconvolutionComputer visionIterative reconstructionWaveletComputer scienceAlgorithmCurveletWavelet transformOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

\n Aims. We propose the application of multiresolution transforms, such as wavelets and curvelets, to reconstruct images of extended objects that have been acquired with adaptive-optics (AO) systems. Such multichannel approaches normally make use of probabilistic tools to distinguish significant structures from noise and reconstruction residuals. We aim to check the prevailing assumption that image-reconstruction algorithms using static point spread functions (PSF) are not suitable for AO imaging.\n Methods. We convolved two images, one of Saturn and one of galaxy M100, taken with the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) with AO PSFs from the 5-m Hale telescope at the Palomar Observatory and added shot and readout noise. Subsequently, we applied different approaches to the blurred and noisy data to recover the original object. The approaches included multiframe blind deconvolution (with the algorithm IDAC), myopic deconvolution with regularization (with MISTRAL) and wavelet- or curvelet-based static PSF deconvolution (AWMLE and ACMLE algorithms). We used the mean squared error (MSE) to compare the results.\n Results. We found that multichannel deconvolution with a static PSF produces generally better results than the results obtained with the myopic/blind approaches (for the images we tested), thus showing that the ability of a method to suppress the noise and track the underlying iterative process is just as critical as the capability of the myopic/blind approaches to update the PSF. Furthermore, for these images, the curvelet transform (CT) produces better results than the wavelet transform (WT), as measured in terms of MSE. \n

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score0.831

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it