MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3167431409 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2106.08955

One-dimensional ghost imaging with an electron microscope: a route towards ghost imaging with inelastically scattered electrons

2021· preprint· en· W3167431409 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Enzo Rotunno, Simone Gargiulo, Giovanni Maria Vanacore, Chen Mechel, Amir H. Tavabi, Robert Borkowski, Fabrizio Carbone, I.Maidan, Matteo Zanfrognini, Stefano Frabboni, Tuğrul Güner, Ebrahim Karimi, Ido Kaminer, Vincenzo Grillo

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRandom lasers and scattering media
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanada Research ChairsEuropean Commission
KeywordsGhost imagingElectronPhysicsElectron microscopeOpticsMicroscopeNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In quantum mechanics, entanglement and correlations are not just a mere sporadic curiosity, but rather common phenomena at the basis of an interacting quantum system. In electron microscopy, such concepts have not been extensively explored yet in all their implications; in particular, inelastic scattering can be reanalyzed in terms of correlation between the electron beam and the sample. While classical inelastic scattering simply implies loss of coherence in the electron beam, performing a joint measurement on the electron beam and the sample excitation could restore the coherence and the lost information. Here, we propose to exploit joint measurement in electron microscopy for a surprising and counter-intuitive application of the concept of ghost imaging. Ghost imaging, first proposed in quantum photonics, can be applied partially in electron microscopy by performing joint measurement between the portion of the transmitted electron beam and a photon emitted from the sample reaching a bucket detector. This would permit us to form a one-dimensional virtual image of an object that even has not interacted with the electron beam directly. This technique is extremely promising for low-dose imaging that requires the minimization of radiation exposure for electron-sensitive materials, because the object interacts with other form of waves, e.g., photons/surface plasmon polaritons, and not the electron beam. We demonstrate this concept theoretically for any inelastic electron-sample interaction in which the electron excites a single quantum of a collective mode, such as a photon, plasmon, phonon, magnon, or any optical polariton.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.501
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicRandom lasers and scattering mediaFrench-language works237,207