Deep learning phase recovery: data-driven, physics-driven, or combining both?
Fuente:
arXiv
Salvato in:
| Autori principali: | , |
|---|---|
| Natura: | Preprint |
| Pubblicazione: |
2024
|
| Soggetti: | |
| Accesso online: | |
| Tags: |
Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
|
| _version_ | 1866912032671924224 |
|---|---|
| author | Wang, Kaiqiang Lam, Edmund Y. |
| author_facet | Wang, Kaiqiang Lam, Edmund Y. |
| contents | Phase recovery, calculating the phase of a light wave from its intensity measurements, is essential for various applications, such as coherent diffraction imaging, adaptive optics, and biomedical imaging. It enables the reconstruction of an object's refractive index distribution or topography as well as the correction of imaging system aberrations. In recent years, deep learning has been proven to be highly effective in addressing phase recovery problems. Two most direct deep learning phase recovery strategies are data-driven (DD) with supervised learning mode and physics-driven (PD) with self-supervised learning mode. DD and PD achieve the same goal in different ways and lack the necessary study to reveal similarities and differences. Therefore, in this paper, we comprehensively compare these two deep learning phase recovery strategies in terms of time consumption, accuracy, generalization ability, ill-posedness adaptability, and prior capacity. What's more, we propose a co-driven (CD) strategy of combining datasets and physics for the balance of high- and low-frequency information. The codes for DD, PD, and CD are publicly available at https://github.com/kqwang/DLPR. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2404_01360 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Deep learning phase recovery: data-driven, physics-driven, or combining both? Wang, Kaiqiang Lam, Edmund Y. Image and Video Processing Machine Learning Optics Phase recovery, calculating the phase of a light wave from its intensity measurements, is essential for various applications, such as coherent diffraction imaging, adaptive optics, and biomedical imaging. It enables the reconstruction of an object's refractive index distribution or topography as well as the correction of imaging system aberrations. In recent years, deep learning has been proven to be highly effective in addressing phase recovery problems. Two most direct deep learning phase recovery strategies are data-driven (DD) with supervised learning mode and physics-driven (PD) with self-supervised learning mode. DD and PD achieve the same goal in different ways and lack the necessary study to reveal similarities and differences. Therefore, in this paper, we comprehensively compare these two deep learning phase recovery strategies in terms of time consumption, accuracy, generalization ability, ill-posedness adaptability, and prior capacity. What's more, we propose a co-driven (CD) strategy of combining datasets and physics for the balance of high- and low-frequency information. The codes for DD, PD, and CD are publicly available at https://github.com/kqwang/DLPR. |
| title | Deep learning phase recovery: data-driven, physics-driven, or combining both? |
| topic | Image and Video Processing Machine Learning Optics |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.01360 |