The present invention relates generally to systems and methods for measuring phase characteristics of electromagnetic wavefronts.
Measuring how a wavefront deviates from being perfectly diffraction-limited has many applications. As non-limiting examples, measuring deviations, also referred to as “aberrations”, in a wavefront produced by an optical system, such as a telescope, can reveal manufacturing flaws in the system, since many optical systems, to function as best as is possible, preferably produce diffraction-limited wavefronts. By adding a component to the system that produces a wavefront that is the conjugate of the measured deviations, the system can be made to produce a more diffraction-limited wavefront and, thus, diffraction-limited performance (i.e., best possible performance).
Another example of an application where knowing the aberrations in a wavefront is useful is in correcting human vision. For instance, as noted in U.S. Pat. No. 5,963,300, by measuring deviations from the perfectly spherical in reflections of laser light from the eye of a patient, aberrations of the eye can be measured and, hence, compensated for. In the '300 patent, light that is reflected from a patient's eye is passed through two reticles, and the resulting moire shadow pattern is presented on a screen. An imaging system images the shadow on the screen onto a camera, with subsequent analysis being undertaken of the imaged shadow. The technique of the '300 patent is based on geometrical or ray-tracing analysis, which as recognized herein requires theoretical assumptions to perform the geometrical analysis that limit the amplitude of the aberrations that can be measured as well as limit the accuracy with which the aberrations can be measured.
Certain embodiments of the technology discussed below may provide solutions to one or more of these drawbacks.
A system for determining aberrations in a coherent electromagnetic wavefront includes a reticle that is positioned in the path of the wavefront, and a detector also positioned in the path. In accordance with this aspect, the light detector is located at a diffraction pattern self-imaging plane or Talbot plane relative to the reticle.
A processor may receive the output signal from the light detector and determine aberrations in the beam based thereon. The aberrations in the beam may represent aberrations in the wavefront due to the medium through which it passes, or an object from which it reflects, or the source of the wavefront itself.
In a preferred, non-limiting embodiment, the processor executes logic that includes determining a phase gradient of the wavefront phase-front, and determining coefficients of polynomials based on the phase-front gradient which quantify the aberrations. The coefficients represent aberrations. Preferably, the gradient is obtained from a frequency domain transformation of the beam, wherein the gradient is the derivative of the phase of the wavefront in directions established by the reticle orientation. In a particularly preferred, non-limiting embodiment, the derivatives are determined in at least two directions, and the coefficients are determined by fitting derivatives of a set of known polynomials (such as e.g. Zernike polynomials) to the measured gradient.
In another aspect, a method for determining aberrations in an object includes passing a light beam from the object through a reticle, and then determining derivatives that are associated with the light beam subsequent to the light beam passing through the reticle. Using the derivatives, a measure of aberrations in the object can be output.
In yet another aspect, a computer program product includes a computer readable medium having a program of instructions stored thereon for causing a digital processing apparatus to execute method steps for determining aberrations in a wavefront. These method steps include representing a diffraction pattern produced by a wavefront, and determining directional derivatives of the representation. The derivatives are fit to known polynomials or derivatives thereof to obtain coefficients of polynomials. A wavefront characterization is provided based at least in part on the coefficients, with the wavefront characterization representing aberrations in the wavefront. A frequency domain representation of the image produced by the wavefront may also be generated. Furthermore, the directional derivatives may be determined in two directions.
In still another aspect, an apparatus for detecting aberrations in an object as manifested in a wavefront includes a reticle positioned in a path of the wavefront and a light detector positioned relative to the reticle to receive the diffracted self-image that is associated with the wavefront. The self-imaging distances are at discrete distances from the reticle that are integral multiples of
where p is the period of the reticle and λ is the spectral wavelength of the wavefront. A processor receives signals from the light detector that represent the self-image. The processor derives the wavefront phase gradient associated with the wavefront and uses the coefficients of derivatives of polynomials that define the wavefront to determine the wavefront aberrations.
Another aspect of the invention comprises a system for determining the shape of an electromagnetic wavefront. This system includes at least one reticle positioned in a path of the wavefront to be analyzed and at least one detector positioned to detect the wavefront passing through the reticle. The detector is substantially located at a diffraction pattern self-imaging plane relative to the reticle. The system further comprises at least one processor receiving an output signal from the light detector and calculating the shape of the wavefront based thereon.
Still another aspect of the invention comprises a method for determining aberrations in an optical system comprising at least one optical element. In this method, a test beam is propagated along a path with the optical system in the path of the test beam so as to be illuminated by the test beam. A reticle is inserted in the path of the test beam at a location with respect to the optical system so as to receive light from the optical system. The light propagates through the reticle. Directional derivatives associated with the light are determined subsequent to passing through the reticle. Additionally, the derivatives are used to output a measure of the aberrations.
Yet another aspect of the invention comprises a computer program product comprising a computer readable medium having a program of instructions stored thereon for causing a digital processing apparatus to execute method steps for determining aberrations in a wavefront. These method steps include representing at least a portion of an image produced by the wavefront and determining directional derivatives of the representation. In addition, directional derivatives are fit to known polynomials or derivatives thereof to obtain coefficients of polynomials. Furthermore, a wavefront characterization is provided based at least in part on the coefficients, the wavefront characterization representing aberrations in the wavefront.
Still another aspect of the invention comprises an apparatus for characterizing an object with a wavefront from the object. The apparatus includes at least one reticle positioned in a path of the wavefront and at least one light detector positioned relative to the reticle to receive a self-image diffraction pattern of the reticle produced by the wavefront. The apparatus further includes at least one processor receiving signals from the light detector representative of the self-image diffraction pattern and deriving derivatives associated therewith. The processor uses the derivatives to characterize the object.
Another aspect of the invention comprises a method for determining aberrations in a reflective or internally reflective object system. In this method, a light beam is passed from the object system through a reticle. This light beam produces a near field diffraction pattern at the Talbot plane. The method further comprises imaging the near field diffraction pattern at the Talbot plane and using the near field diffraction pattern to output a measure of aberrations in the light beam.
The details of the various preferred embodiments, both as to their structure and operation, can best be understood in reference to the accompanying drawings, in which like reference numerals refer to like parts, and in which:
a is a block diagram of another implementation of the system shown in FIG. I;
a-3c are schematic diagrams illustrating one method for converting the image produced at the self-image plane into gradient information corresponding to the wavefront at that self-image plane;
Referring initially to
As shown in
In a non-limiting, exemplary embodiment, the wavefront incident on the imaging detector can be represented by the following diffraction equation:
where: λ is the wavelength of the coherent wavefront, z is the propagation distance with the associated vector {right arrow over (z)} in propagation direction, p is the period of the reticle (distance from the beginning of one grid line to the next grid line), r is the spatial dimension in the plane of the detector with its associated vector {right arrow over (r)}, {circumflex over (r)} is the corresponding unit vector, {circumflex over (p)} the unit vector representing the reticle orientation, and {right arrow over (∇)} is the directional-derivative (or, gradient) of the wavefront phase “w” that is being measured. The self-imaging distance is dependent on the spectral wavelength of the coherent wavefront and the spatial frequency of the reticle and is given by:
where n is the integer multiple at which distances the self-images occurs. For example, for a reticle having a grating spacing, p, of 50 micrometers (μm), this distance, d, may be between about 2.9 to 3.0 millimeters (mm) or in proximity thereto for light having a wavelength of 850 nanometers (nm). Integer multiples of this distance may be appropriate as well.
As described below, this reticle 20 may comprise rulings in orthogonal x and y directions having substantially the same period p. In other embodiments, the spacing px and py of the orthogonal rulings may be different for the x and y directions. Corresponding self-image planes at distances dx and dy for the different directed rulings may result. Similarly, use of more than one or two reticle patterns superimposed on another having same or different periodicity are considered possible.
The self-imaged reticle on the light sensor or detector 22 that is located at the self-image plane contains the desired information pertaining to the phase characteristics of the coherent wavefront. This information is extracted from the spatial signal collected at the sensor 22 and sent to a data processor (i.e., computer) 24 for processing in accordance with the disclosure below. To undertake the logic, the processor 24 accesses a preferably software-implemented module 26, and outputs a signal representative of the wavefront (or a conjugate thereof) to an output device 28, such as but not limited to a printer, monitor, computer, network, or other appropriate device.
In various embodiments, the beam that emerges from the reticle 20 establishes a diffraction pattern. This pattern, however, substantially cannot be discerned except at the self-image planes that are spaced integer multiples of a distance “d” from the reticle 20, as discussed above. Thus, the self image diffraction pattern can be detected by the light sensor or detector 22 that in one preferred embodiment is placed at the first (n=1) self-image plane as shown in
Logic may be executed on the architecture shown in
In other words, the logic may be embodied by a computer program that is executed by the processor 24 as a series of computer- or control element-executable instructions. These instructions may reside, for example, in RAM or on a hard drive or optical drive, or the instructions may be stored on magnetic tape, electronic read-only memory, or other appropriate data storage device that can be dynamically changed or updated.
a shows a particular non-limiting implementation of the system 10 in which the electromagnetic energy is reflected from an object or is internally reflected from within an object. Examples of applications include microwave topography of large surfaces, wherein the electromagnetic energy is microwave and the object is the surface sought to be measured; optical topography of reflective surfaces, wherein the electromagnetic energy is laser light; retinal reflection within an eye in order to measure the aberrations of the eye, and gamma ray reflection within very small objects in order to characterize mechanical or optical properties.
Accordingly, for illustration purposes
The logic of the processor 24 can be appreciated in reference to
The self-image diffraction pattern caused by the beam 18 passing through the reticle 20 is acquired at block 33 by the sensor or detector 22 and is represented by the signal output by the light detector 22, as received by the processor 24. Proceeding to block 34, the signal in the spatial image domain is transformed to the spatial frequency domain. In one non-limiting embodiment, executing a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) on the signal performs this, although it is to be understood that other mathematical transformations can be used. While
Proceeding to block 36, regions of interest in the frequency domain may be selected based on the reticle period, illumination (i.e., wavelength), and other factors discussed further below. This selection can be a priori, and need not be undertaken during measurement. Essentially, at block 36 the regions of interest for which the gradient (directional derivative) of the wavefront is to be determined are located in the spatial frequency domain and isolated.
In various preferred embodiments, the portions of the spatial frequency domain that contain the slope information and that consequently are isolated depend on the configuration of the reticle 20 and can be, e.g., represented by distributions mapped on different places on orthogonal axes in frequency space. Suitable spatial frequency domain manipulation is further illustrated in
Proceeding to block 38, an inverse transform is applied only to the isolated frequency space regions of the signal to render a spatial representation of the gradient of the wavefront preferably in the direction normal to the linear or segmented linear dimension of the reticle. Thus, if the reticle contains a singular set of linear grating lines, there will be two regions of the spatial frequency domain containing the desired information. If there are two sets of linear gratings superimposed in the reticle, the spatial frequency domain will contain four regions of interest. Each additional set of linear gratings provides more information pertaining to the wavefront gradient. In the limit, a circular grating reticle represents an infinite number of segmented linear gratings superimposed on each other. Preferably, the reticle contains two orthogonal superimposed linear grating patterns. In a non-limiting preferred embodiment, the wavefront gradient is determined in isolated regions in two directions. In a non-limiting example, when the object 12 is a human eye, the two directions are orthogonal to each other and lie in a plane defined by the front of and tangential to the patient's eye, with one of the directions extending from the center of the eye at a 45.degree. angle relative to the horizontal and tangent to the eye when the, patient is standing and facing directly forward.
If desired, in a non-limiting embodiment filtering of random background noise can be further applied by using a “computationally-implemented” matte screen by which the spatial characteristics of the self-image are enhanced and the background reduced to very low (e.g., approximately zero) frequency components in the spatial frequency domain. This principle will be further discussed in relation to
Moving to block 40, a set of known functions such as polynomials (and their derivatives) is defined or otherwise accessed for the two directions mentioned above. These polynomials can be used to model the wavefront. In one preferred, non-limiting embodiment, a set of 36 Zernike polynomials are used. Then, at block 42 the derivatives of the known polynomials are fit to the derivatives (i.e., gradient) determined at block 38 using, e.g., a least squares fit or other fitting algorithm.
The outcome of the fitting step at block 42 is that each polynomial has an accompanying coefficient, also referred to as the “amplitude” of the polynomial. Each coefficient represents an aberration from the perfectly spherical in the return beam 18 and, hence, an aberration in the object 12. Consequently, at block 44 a reconstructed wavefront equation can be output (to, e.g., the output device 28) that is the set of the known polynomials with the coefficients obtained in the fitting step at block 42. At block 46, the output, and in particular the coefficients in the reconstructed wavefront equation, can be used to indicate aberrations in the original wavefront and, hence, in the object 12. Furthermore, the output can be used as a basis for implementing corrective optics for the system 12 that essentially represent the conjugate of the polynomials and/or coefficients to reduce or null out the aberrations of the object 12.
A schematic representation of an exemplary process for characterizing a wavefront gradient is depicted in
Without subscribing to any particular scientific theories, the above operations by which the wavefront is extracted from equation (1) can be expressed in analytical form as follows. First, the non-limiting Fourier transform on the wavefront executed at block 50 in
wherein the notation f1x,y, f2x,y, f3x,y and f4x,y indicates that in certain embodiments described above such as illustrated in
Then, the gradient (∇w) of the wavefront is determined by performing the inverse Fourier transform (F−1) on equation (3) as follows:
F−1{F(∇w)}∇w
Next, the set of partial derivatives, or gradients, of the chosen polynomial set, e.g., Zernike polynomials (∇Z, or Zx and Zy) are made to best approximate the gradient of the phase front (∇w) via one or more fitting algorithms such as for example a least squares algorithm. That is.
where, n is the number of polynomials chosen to best approximate the wavefront phase gradient, and Ai is the coefficient, or amplitude, of the polynomial Zi. The wavefront phase “w” can now be described as follows:
The aberrations in the wavefront can be described by the values of the coefficients Ai.
The flow chart of
The contrast of the image and the self-image fundamental spatial frequency are respectively received from blocks 70 and 71 and input to block 72, where the two inputs are compared to discriminate the self-image signal. If the contrast from block 70 is lower than the fundamental spatial frequency from block 71, the matte screen is implemented within block 34 of
By employing methods such as described above, a mathematical representation of the wavefront and of the aberrations can be obtained. Additionally, conjugate structures, e.g., conjugate optics, can be created to substantially offset or cancel the aberrations in the wavefront. In the case, for example, where the wavefront in the eye is measured, these conjugate optics, e.g., may take the form of a corrective lens and the method of measuring the wavefront described above can be employed to determine the appropriate prescription for such a lens.
Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the methods and designs described above have additional applications and that the relevant applications are not limited to those specifically recited above. Also, the present invention may be embodied in other specific forms without departing from the essential characteristics as described herein. The embodiments described above are to be considered in all respects as illustrative only and not restrictive in any manner.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application No. 10/314,906, filed Dec. 9, 2002, which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application No. 10/014,037, filed Dec. 10, 2001, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,781,681, each of which are hereby incorporated by reference in their entireties.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4105302 | Tate, Jr. | Aug 1978 | A |
4670646 | Spivey | Jun 1987 | A |
4711576 | Ban | Dec 1987 | A |
5062702 | Bille | Nov 1991 | A |
5080477 | Adachi | Jan 1992 | A |
5164750 | Adachi | Nov 1992 | A |
5528321 | Blum et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5777719 | Williams et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5898479 | Hubbard et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5929970 | Mihashi | Jul 1999 | A |
5949521 | Williams et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5963300 | Horwitz | Oct 1999 | A |
6007204 | Fahrenkrug et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6050687 | Bille et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6086204 | Magnante | Jul 2000 | A |
6095651 | Williams et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6112114 | Dreher | Aug 2000 | A |
6120150 | Sarver et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6155684 | Bille et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6199986 | Williams et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6234631 | Sarver et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6256098 | Rubinstein et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6257723 | Sarver et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6270221 | Liang et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6271915 | Frey et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6299311 | Williams et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6305802 | Roffman et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6309068 | Kohayakawa | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6338559 | Williams et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6379005 | Williams et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6379008 | Chateau et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6382795 | Lai | May 2002 | B1 |
6394605 | Campin et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6396588 | Sei | May 2002 | B1 |
6460997 | Frey et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6499843 | Cox et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6550917 | Neal et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6554429 | Campin et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6573997 | Goldberg et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6607274 | Stantz et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6736510 | Van Heugten | May 2004 | B1 |
6781681 | Horwitz | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6786602 | Abitbol | Sep 2004 | B2 |
20010033362 | Sarver | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20010035939 | Mihashi et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20010041884 | Frey et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020047992 | Graves et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020122153 | Piers et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020140902 | Guirao et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020167643 | Youssefi | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020186346 | Stantz et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020196412 | Abitbol | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030011745 | Molebny et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030151721 | Lai et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
42 22 395 | Jan 1994 | DE |
1 153 570 | Nov 2001 | EP |
WO-9201417 | Feb 1992 | WO |
WO-9827863 | Jul 1998 | WO |
WO-9966308 | Dec 1999 | WO |
WO-0010448 | Mar 2000 | WO |
WO-0019885 | Apr 2000 | WO |
WO-0147449 | Jul 2001 | WO |
WO-0158339 | Aug 2001 | WO |
WO-0182791 | Nov 2001 | WO |
WO-0189424 | Nov 2001 | WO |
WO-0209579 | Feb 2002 | WO |
WO-0219901 | Mar 2002 | WO |
WO-0228272 | Apr 2002 | WO |
WO-0230273 | Apr 2002 | WO |
WO-03009746 | Feb 2003 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20070002332 A1 | Jan 2007 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 10314906 | Dec 2002 | US |
Child | 11371038 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 10014037 | Dec 2001 | US |
Child | 10314906 | US |