4.7 Article

Focal plane wavefront sensing using machine learning: performance of convolutional neural networks compared to fundamental limits

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 505, Issue 4, Pages 5702-5713

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stab1634

Keywords

instrumentation: high angular resolution, adaptive optics; methods: numerical

Funding

  1. European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program [819155]
  2. Federation Wallonia-Brussels

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Focal plane wavefront sensing is a promising technique that offers high sensitivity and immunity to NCPAs, but requires addressing high computational burden and phase ambiguity. By utilizing deep convolutional neural networks to measure NCPAs based on focal plane images, the models can reach the photon noise limit in a wide range of conditions.
Focal plane wavefront sensing (FPWFS) is appealing for several reasons. Notably, it offers high sensitivity and does not suffer from non-common path aberrations (NCPAs). The price to pay is a high computational burden and the need for diversity to lift any phase ambiguity. If those limitations can be overcome, FPWFS is a great solution for NCPA measurement, a key limitation for high-contrast imaging, and could be used as adaptive optics wavefront sensor. Here, we propose to use deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to measure NCPAs based on focal plane images. Two CNN architectures are considered: ResNet-50 and U-Net that are used, respectively, to estimate Zernike coefficients or directly the phase. The models are trained on labelled data sets and evaluated at various flux levels and for two spatial frequency contents (20 and 100 Zernike modes). In these idealized simulations, we demonstrate that the CNN-based models reach the photon noise limit in a large range of conditions. We show, for example, that the root mean squared wavefront error can be reduced to

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available