MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311164383 · doi:10.18280/ts.390538

A Hybrid Iterative Algorithm of Amplitude Weighting and Phase Gradient Descent for Generating Phase-Only Fourier Hologram

2022· article· en· W4311164383 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jin Yang, Chengtao Du, Jie Fang, Haibo Wang, Chenlu Li

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicDigital Holography and Microscopy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHefei Normal UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAlgorithmGradient descentAmplitudeWeightingIterative reconstructionPhase (matter)Conjugate gradient methodPhase retrievalFourier transformMathematicsConvergence (economics)Iterative methodImage qualityExponential functionComputer scienceImage (mathematics)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkOpticsPhysicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reconstruction of target images from phase-only hologram (POH) has the advantages of high diffraction efficiency and no conjugate terms. The Gerchberg-Saxton (GS) algorithm is a classical algorithm applied to recover the phase, but it most likely stagnantes after a few iterations. This paper proposes a hybrid iterative algorithm of Amplitude Weighting and Phase Gradient Descent (AW-PGD) to generate a higher-quality POH. Firstly, the quadratic phase is used as the initial phase, zero-pads the periphery of the target image, and then multiplies the two to form the complex amplitude as the iterative initial value. During iteration, the amplitude of the reconstructed image is constrained by an adaptive dynamic exponential term in the signal region to improve the reconstruction accuracy, the constraint in the non-signal region is relaxed to reduce the computational effort at the same time; and the phase gradient descent technology is used to increase the iteration step and speed up the convergence. Finally, the target image amplitude is reconstructed based on the generated POH. The numerical simulation results show that the algorithm does not have a significant increase in time cost with better reconstruction quality than the GS, Weighted GS (WGS) and Adaptive Weighted GS (AWGS) algorithm.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicDigital Holography and MicroscopyFrench-language works237,207