Super-resolution far-field sub-wavelength imaging using multiple holography
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Losing the information contained in evanescent waves scattered from an object limits the best achievable resolution in far-field optical imaging systems to about half of the wavelength. This limitation is known as the diffraction limit. In this paper, we propose a new holography-based far-field imaging technique to go beyond the diffraction limit and achieve super-resolution images. In the proposed method, after the recording process, multiple reconstruction processes with appropriate reconstruction waves are performed to extract information about sub-wavelength features of a target object encoded in the evanescent waves scattered from it. It is analytically proved that in the proposed method, by increasing the number of reconstruction steps, the resolution increases. The performance of the method is numerically validated. In numerical analysis, by performing two reconstruction steps, a resolution of 1/14 of the working wavelength is achieved. This resolution can be further improved by increasing the number of reconstruction steps.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it