4.5 Article

Influence of drift correction precision on super-resolution localization microscopy

期刊

APPLIED OPTICS
卷 61, 期 13, 页码 3516-3522

出版社

Optica Publishing Group
DOI: 10.1364/AO.451561

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81827901]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2018KFYXKJC039]
  3. Hainan University [KYQD(ZR)-20077]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper investigates the relationship among drift correction precision, localization precision, and position estimation precision through theoretical analysis and simulation. It proposes the concept of relative localization precision to evaluate the impact of drift correction on imaging resolution. This is of great significance for selecting the appropriate drift correction method.
Super-resolution localization microscopy (SRLM) breaks the diffraction limit successfully and improves the resolution of optical imaging systems by nearly an order of magnitude. However, SRLM typically takes several minutes or longer to collect a sufficient number of image frames that are required for reconstructing a final super-resolution image. During this long image acquisition period, system drift should be tightly controlled to ensure the imaging quality; thus, several drift correction methods have been developed. However, it is still unclear whether the performance of these methods is able to ensure sufficient image quality in SRLM. Without a clear answer to this question, it is hard to choose a suitable drift correction method for a specificSRLMexperiment. In this paper, we use both theoretical analysis and simulation to investigate the relationship among drift correction precision, localization precision, and position estimation precision. We propose a concept of relative localization precision for evaluating the effect of drift correction on imaging resolution, which would help to select an appropriate drift correction method for a specific experiment. (c) 2022 Optica Publishing Group

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据