The present invention relates to methods and apparatus to obtain phase information characterizing light, using a plurality of images encoding information about the intensity of the light.
When coherent (laser) light passes through or reflects from an object, its amplitude and phase are altered as it continues to propagate. Phase perturbations contain important information about an object. For example, transparent biological cells are invisible in a focused microscope, but impart distinct phase changes. Data about these phase changes can find useful applications in morphology analysis of cell, or cell-cycle analysis without labelling. Such applications are relevant for biology and biomedical engineering, e.g., for detecting cancer cells. Moreover, there are various applications in materials science.
It is noteworthy that only the intensity of light can be measured directly, since phase oscillates far too quickly, and therefore, the phase needs to be reconstructed computationally. This “phase problem” of optical imaging has been around for decades, but only recently has been posed as an inference problem [1, 2]. This breakthrough, in principle, allows for much more experimental noise in the images, and as a consequence, enables applications of phase imaging where there is little light and much background noise (e.g., underwater imaging).
Traditional methods for phase recovery include phase contrast microscopy, differential interference contrast microscopy, and digital holography [3,4,5]. All of the three methods use a reference wavefront to obtain the amplitude and phase information. The phase image recovered by phase contrast microscopy is a function of the optical path length magnitude of the object. Differential interference contrast microscopy obtains the gradients of the optical length, but it can only be used when the object has a similar refractive index to the surroundings. Digital holography uses an interferometer setup to record the interference between a reference beam and a beam which has interacted with an object to be imaged. A computer is used to calculate the object image with a numerical reconstruction algorithm. So digital holography has the advantage of giving quantifiable information about optical distance, while phase contrast microscopy and differential interference contrast microscopy just provide a distorting of the bright field image with phase shift information. However, the experimental setup for digital holography is usually complicated, and has high requirements on the wave path [6,7]. For instance, the reference beam and target beam need to be accurately aligned.
An alternative approach is based on exploiting the physics of wavefront propagation. Consider the experimental arrangement shown in
The object to be imaged, which is placed at the object plane 5, modifies the light passing through it, producing, at each point in the object plane 5, a corresponding amplitude contrast and phase difference. In example, the phase difference produced by the object at each point in the 2-D object plane is as shown as 10a in
One method for doing this is the Gerchberg-Saxton (GS) method [9.10], which treats the problem as convex optimization and iterates back and forth between two domains (an in-focus image and a Fourier domain image) to reduce error at each iteration. It is strongly sensitive to the noise in the latter image. An alternative method is a direct method [11,12,13] which exploits the Transport of Intensity Equation (TIE); it is based on first- and higher-order derivatives, and it is not robust to noise. Thus, although the GS and direct methods are computationally efficient, they are both very sensitive to noise.
A few statistical approaches have been proposed as well; an approximation to the maximum likelihood estimator is derived in [2, 14]. However, it easily gets stuck in local maxima, and sometimes leads to poor results. In [1] an augmented complex extended Kalman filter (ACEKF) was used to solve for phase with significant noise corruption.
However, the memory requirements are of order N2 where N is the number of pixels in each intensity image, which is unfeasible for practical image sizes of multiple megapixels, and the long computation times are impractical for real-time applications, such as in biology, biomedical engineering and beyond. In [8] a diagonalized complex extended Kalman filter (diagonalized CEKF) was proposed to alleviate those issues, without jeopardizing the reconstruction accuracy. The diagonalized CEKF is iterative: it needs to cycle through the set of intensity images repeatedly, yielding more accurate phase reconstruction after each cycle. On the other hand, the computational complexity increases with each cycle.
The present invention aims to provide new and useful methods and apparatus for obtaining phase information concerning a light beam, and in particular a light beam which has interacted with an object to be imaged.
The invention relates to an experimental situation in which an intensity image is collected at each of a plurality of locations spaced apart in a propagation direction of a light beam. Thus, typical embodiments of the invention do not require a reference beam, or rely on interference phenomena. Wavefront propagation means that that plurality of images encode phase information, and the intensity images are used in combination to extract the phase information. The invention proposes in general terms that information from the intensity images is combined using a Kalman filter which assumes that at least one co-variance matrix has a diagonal form. This leads to considerable reduction in computational complexity.
In another aspect, the invention further proposes that an augmented Kalman filter model (augmented space state model) is used in place of the standard Kalman filter model. The augmented Kalman filter improves the robustness to noise.
The result of combining these aspects of the invention is a sparse ACEKF (Sparse augmented complex extended Kalman filter) which can efficiently recover amplitude and phase of an optical field from a series of noisy defocused images. The approach is inspired by [1], which is rooted in statistics and yields reliable phase estimation methods that are robust to noise. However, whereas the ACEKF method of [1] is computationally unwieldy and impractical, preferred embodiments of the present invention are very efficient. The embodiment employs the augmented state space model, and reconstructs the phase by conducting Kalman filtering approximately yet much more efficiently, without losing accuracy in the phase reconstruction. The sparse ACEKF algorithm employs two covariance matrices which are each approximated as a diagonal matrices, or a diagonal matrix multiplied by a permutation matrix. One of these covariance matrices is a pseudo-covariance matrix. For a given matrix A we refer to A* as its “conjugate”. The two diagonal covariance matrices, and their conjugates are the four components of a composite covariance matrix. As a result, the phase estimation method is very efficient, and no iterations are needed. It seems to be feasible for phase recovery in real-time, which is entirely unfeasible with ACEKF. In other words, the proposed method provides robust recovery of the phase, while being fast and efficient.
The advantages of preferred embodiments are as follows:
In summary, the advantages and disadvantages of the various methods are given in Table 1
An embodiment of the invention will now be described for the sake of example only with reference to the following figures, in which:
A flow chart of the embodiment is shown in
The remaining steps employ a novel augmented state space model. In step 13 parameters of the model are initialised. In step 14, the data for a first of the series of images is used to update the model. As described below this makes use of a novel phase reconstruction algorithm, assuming a diagonal covariance matrix. Step 14 is performed repeatedly for successive ones of the series of images, until all images have been processed.
We aim at estimating the 2D complex-field A(x,y,z0) at the focal plane z0, from a sequence of noisy intensity images I(x,y,z) captured at various distances z0, z1, z2, . . . , zn . . . , zN. In the following explanation it is assumed, for simplicity, that the focal plane z0 is at one end of the series of images, but in fact it is straightforward to generalise this to a situation in which it is in the middle of the set of images (as shown in
where λ is the wavelength of the illumination, and ∇⊥ is the gradient operator in the lateral (x,y) dimensions. The noisy measurements I(x,y,z) usually adhere to a (continuous) Poisson distribution:
where γ is the photon count detected by the camera. The measurement at each pixel I(x,y,z) is assumed statistically independent of any other pixel (conditioned on the optical field A(x,y,z)).
We can discretize the optical field A(x,y,z) as a raster-scanned complex column vector an, and similarly discretize the intensity measurement I(x,y,z) as column vector In. We denote by b(u,v,z) the 2-D Fourier transform of A(x,y,z). The column vector bn is again raster-scanned from b(u,v,z), and hence can be expressed as bn=Kan, where K where is the discrete Fourier transform matrix. Since K is unitary, we can write KKH=KHK=U (with normalization), where U is the identity matrix and KH denotes the hermitian of K.
We can define the propagation matrix at zn as [15]:
where Lx and Ly are the width and height of the image, respectively. The relation between two images with distance Δnz in the Fourier domain can be written as:
b
n
=H
n
b
n-1 (4)
We approximate the Poisson observation (2) with a Gaussian distribution of same mean and covariance. In particular, we consider the approximate observation model:
I
n
=γ|a
n|2+v (5)
where v is a Gaussian vector with zero mean and covariance R=γdiag(a*n)diag(an).
The nonlinear observation model in (5) is linearized as:
I
n=γdiag(a*n)an+v (6)
The embodiment uses an augmented state space model given as:
where v is a Gaussian variable with zero mean and covariance R,
The state covariance matrix of the augmented state has the form:
Here SnQ or SnP are covariance matrices (SnP is in fact a pseudo-covariance matrix). From the update equations of ACEKF [1,16], we have the following steps:
1. Initialize: b0, SQ0 and SPO.
2. Predict: {circumflex over (b)}n=Hbn-1, ŜnQ=HSn-1QHH and ŜnP=HSn-1PHH
3. Update:
S
n
Q
=Ŝ
n
Q−(ŜnQJH+ŜnPJT)(JŜnQJH+JŜnPJT+J*(ŜnQ)*JT+J*(ŜnP)*JH+R)−1(JŜnQ+J(ŜnP)*) (11)
S
n
P
=Ŝ
n
P−(ŜnQJH+ŜnPJT)(JŜnQJH+JŜnPJ*(ŜnQ)*JT+J*(ŜnP)*JH+R)−1(JŜnP+J(ŜnQ)*) (12)
G
n=(SnQJH+SnPJT)R−1 (13)
b
n
={circumflex over (b)}
n
+G
n(In−γ|an|2) (14)
The size of SnQ or SnP, is N2, where N is the number of the pixels in the image. The inversion of the covariance matrix has a computational complexity of O(N3) in each step. Both the storage requirement and computational burden make the above update algorithm impractical for real applications.
Accordingly, the embodiment makes some constraints and derivations as described below, resulting in a low-complexity algorithm with reduced storage requirement.
After some derivation, we can get Lemma 1 and Theorem 1 and 2.
If H is diagonal and the diagonal entries of H are rotationally symmetric in 2-D, then EHE=H where E=KKT, and K is the Discrete Fourier Transform Matrix.
Let us consider how to initialize the covariance matrix S0. First note that a priori one would expect
S
n
Q
=E[b
n
b
n
H
]=E[Ka
n
a
n
H
K
H
]=KE[a
n
a
n
H
]K
H
S
n
P
=E[b
n
b
n
T
]=E[Ka
n
a
n
T
K
T
]=KE[a
n
a
n
T
]K
T
Here E[ . . . ] denotes expectation value. It is assumed that in the complex field every pixel is independently Poisson distributed, we can assume that E[an anT] is equal to a scalar times the identity matrix. Thus, the covariance matrix can be initialized as:
S
0
Q
=Q
0
KK
H
=Q
0
S
0
T
=P
0
KK
T
=P
0
E
where Q0 and P0 are a scalar times the identity matrix. E=KKT can be shown to be a permutation matrix, and symmetric.
More generally, we write
S
n-1
Q
=Q
n-1, and (15)
S
n-1
P
=P
n-1
E (16)
where Qn-1 and Pn-1 are diagonal. The covariance matrix can be updated as follows
Predict:
{circumflex over (Q)}
n
=Q
n-1 (17)
{circumflex over (P)}
n
=HP
n-1
H (18)
Update:
Q
n
={circumflex over (Q)}
n−({circumflex over (Q)}n+{circumflex over (P)}n)({circumflex over (Q)}n+{circumflex over (P)}n+({circumflex over (Q)}n)*+({circumflex over (P)}n)*+qI)−1({circumflex over (Q)}n+({circumflex over (P)}n)*) (19)
P
n
={circumflex over (P)}
n−({circumflex over (Q)}n+{circumflex over (P)}n)({circumflex over (Q)}n+{circumflex over (P)}n+({circumflex over (Q)}n)*+({circumflex over (P)}n)*+qI)−1({circumflex over (P)}n+({circumflex over (Q)}n)*) (20)
S
n
Q
=Q
n (21)
S
n
P
=P
n
E (22)
where
Note that Qn and Pn are diagonal. The covariance matrix SnQ and SnP has the same form as the covariance Sn-1Q and Sn-1P. Therefore once the first covariance matrix are initialized as S0Q=Q0 and S0P=P0E, the other matrices in the following steps has the same form.
The proof of theorem 1 requires the assumption that the value of the phase is small so that, defining D by
it can be approximated that D*D−1 equals the identity matrix.
The Kalman gain and update formula for the state are
G
n=(SnQJH+SnPJT)R−1=+(Qn+Pn)(J)−1q (23)
b
n
={circumflex over (b)}
n
+G
n(In−γ|an|2) (24)
Using these results, the algorithm presented above can be reformulated as a Sparse augmented complex extended Kalman filter algorithm, used by the embodiment:
{circumflex over (b)}
n
=Hb
n-1 (25)
{circumflex over (Q)}
n
=Q
n-1 (26)
{circumflex over (P)}
n
=HP
n-1
H (27)
â
n
=K
H
{circumflex over (b)}
n (28)
Q
n
={circumflex over (Q)}
n−({circumflex over (Q)}n+{circumflex over (P)}n)({circumflex over (Q)}n+{circumflex over (P)}n+({circumflex over (Q)}n)*+({circumflex over (P)}n)*+qI)−1({circumflex over (Q)}n+({circumflex over (P)}n)*) (29)
P
n
={circumflex over (P)}
n−({circumflex over (Q)}n+{circumflex over (P)}n)({circumflex over (Q)}n+{circumflex over (P)}n+({circumflex over (Q)}n)*+({circumflex over (P)}n)*+qI)−1({circumflex over (P)}n+({circumflex over (Q)}n)*) (30)
b
n
={circumflex over (b)}
n+(Qn+Pn)(J)−1q(In−γ|an|2)
Matrices Q, and Pn are diagonal, hence they can be stored as two vectors. The storage burden of equations (11), (12) in the update step is reduced from N2 to N. The inverse of J in equation (31) can be computed by a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT). Since Qn and Pn are diagonal, the matrix multiplications and inversions in equations (29) and (30) have a computational complexity of O(N). The overall computational complexity of the sparse ACEKF is at the scale of O(Nz N log(N)) due to the FFT.
Three sets of data have been considered to assess the performance the augmented Kalman filter. Data Set 1 consists of 100 images of size 100×100 pixels artificially generated to simulate a complex field propagating from focus in 0.5 μm steps over a distance of 50 μm with illumination wavelength of 532 nm. Pixels are corrupted by Poisson noise so that, on average, each pixel detects γ=0.998 photons.
Data Set 2 comprises 50 images of size 150×150 pixels acquired by a microscope. The wavelength was again 532 nm, and the defocused intensity images were captured by moving the camera axially with a step size of 2 μm over a distance of 100 μm.
Data Set 3 has 101 images of size 492×656 pixels acquired by a microscope. The wavelength was 633 nm, and the images were captured by moving the camera axially with a step size of 2 μm.
Table 2 summarizes the results of Data Set 1 using three methods: ACEKF (augmented complex extended Kalman filter) [1], diagonalized CEKF (diagonalized complex extended Kalman filter) [8], and the method sparse ACEKF (Sparse augmented complex extended Kalman filter) used in the embodiment. The ACEKF method has a high computational complexity of O(NzN3) and storage requirement of O(N2). In order to alleviate the computational burden of ACEKF, the images are divided into independent blocks of size 50×50, but it still takes 13562.8 seconds by a general personal computer. On the other hand, the computational complexity of the sparse ACEKF is 0(NzN log N), and it takes 0.40 seconds to process the 100 (full) images.
As illustrated in Table 2, the computational complexity of the diagonalized CEKF is lower than that of ACEKF. However, the latter yields better results in terms of phase error. In order to reduce the error of the diagonalized CEKF, forward and backward sweeps (iterations) are applied in [8]. However, the iteration increases the computational complexity linearly, and makes the method no longer recursive. The sparse ACEKF method has an intensity error of 0.0071, and a phase error of 0.0143 (radian). Compared with the diagonalized CEKF, the sparse ACEKF has the same computational complexity and storage requirement, but returns lower error images.
The error is here calculated by root mean square error (MSE). However, MSE might not be optimal to evaluate the error. The proposed sparse ACEKF has an error near to ACEKF, while the recovered phase and intensity images of the sparse ACEKF in
a) shows the recovered phase [nm] of the Data Set 3 by ACEKF, the diagonalized CEKF, and the sparse ACEKF. The real depth of the sample in Data Set 3 is around 75 nm±5 nm. The proposed embodiment takes 20.24 seconds to process 101 images of size 492×656. However, the ACEKF method takes 54.15 hours and each image is separated into 117 pieces of 50×50 blocks.
There are other state space models for which the concept of a diagonal covariance matrix can be applied. For example, based on (4)-(6) we have a state space model:
State: bn=Hnbn-1;
Observation: In=γdiag(a*n)an+v
We can define the follow three steps using a standard Kalman filter [16]:
(1) Initialization: b0 and error covariance matrix, MO.
(2) Prediction: {circumflex over (b)}n=Hbn-1; {circumflex over (M)}n=HMn-1HH
(3) Update: Gn={circumflex over (M)}nJH(J{circumflex over (M)}nJH+R)−1
b
n
={circumflex over (b)}
n
+G
n(In−J{circumflex over (b)}n)
M
n
={circumflex over (M)}
n
−G
n
J{circumflex over (M)}
n
It can be shown that provided M0 is initialized with a diagonal covariance matrix (specifically M0 is a scalar times U), the state covariance matrix for all n is diagonal. In this case the update procedure becomes simply:
The inverse of J can be computed efficiently by means of a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) algorithm. Both the embodiment described in the previous sections, and this variation, are low-complexity algorithms. As compared the embodiment, this variation takes more iterations to converge, but it has the advantage of being more stable.
The method could efficiently recover phase and amplitude from a series of noisy defocused images. It is recursive, and feasible for the real time application. The phase from intensity techniques could find applications in areas such as biology and surface profiling. Due to the scalability of the wave equations and the simplicity of the measurement technique, this method could find use in phase imaging beyond optical wavelengths (for example, X-ray or neutron imaging), where high-quality images are difficult to obtain and noise is significant and unavoidable.
Digital holographic microscopy (DHM) has been successfully applied in a range of application areas [5]. However, due to DHM's capability of non-invasively visualizing and quantifying biological tissue, biomedical applications have received most attention. Wave propagation based methods, and the proposed method in particular, may be applied to the same range of applications. Examples of biomedical applications are [5]:
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61595475 | Feb 2012 | US |