Fourier Ptychographic Microscopy via Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fourier ptychographic microscopy (FPM) has risen as a promising computational imaging technique that breaks the trade-off between high resolution and large field of view (FOV). Its reconstruction is normally formulated as a blind phase retrieval problem, where both the object and probe have to be recovered from phaseless measured data. However, the stability and reconstruction quality may dramatically deteriorate in the presence of noise interference. Herein, we utilized the concept of alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM) to solve this problem (termed ADMM-FPM) by breaking it into multiple subproblems, each of which may be easier to deal with. We compared its performance against existing algorithms in both simulated and practical FPM platform. It is found that ADMM-FPM method belongs to a global optimization algorithm with a high degree of parallelism and thus results in a more stable and robust phase recovery under noisy conditions. We anticipate that ADMM will rekindle interest in FPM as more modifications and innovations are implemented in the future.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".