• Acta Photonica Sinica
  • Vol. 53, Issue 8, 0801003 (2024)
Han GUO1,2,3, Wang ZHAO2,3, Shuai WANG2,3,*, Ping YANG2,3..., Lisong YAN1, Shenghu LIU2,3,4, Hongli GUAN2,3,4 and Chensi ZHAO2,3,4|Show fewer author(s)
Author Affiliations
  • 1School of Optics and Electronic Information, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430070, China
  • 2Key Laboratory of Adaptive Optics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu 610209, China
  • 3Institute of Optoelectronic Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chengdu 610209, China
  • 4University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
  • show less
    DOI: 10.3788/gzxb20245308.0801003 Cite this Article
    Han GUO, Wang ZHAO, Shuai WANG, Ping YANG, Lisong YAN, Shenghu LIU, Hongli GUAN, Chensi ZHAO. Subspot Background Noise Removal Method Based on Bezier Surface Fitting[J]. Acta Photonica Sinica, 2024, 53(8): 0801003 Copy Citation Text show less
    Bezier surface
    Fig. 1. Bezier surface
    The influence of the position and number of control points on the fitting results
    Fig. 2. The influence of the position and number of control points on the fitting results
    Selected control points for Bessel surface fitting with a single sub-aperture
    Fig. 3. Selected control points for Bessel surface fitting with a single sub-aperture
    Skylight background simulation results
    Fig. 4. Skylight background simulation results
    Denoising results of each method under skylight background only
    Fig. 5. Denoising results of each method under skylight background only
    Influence of sub-spot on surface fitting results
    Fig. 6. Influence of sub-spot on surface fitting results
    The result of processing the spot image under the interference of sky light background by different methods
    Fig. 7. The result of processing the spot image under the interference of sky light background by different methods
    Error of centroid calculation by different methods when BSR is 100
    Fig. 8. Error of centroid calculation by different methods when BSR is 100
    BSR of spot array diagram with different off-axis angles of the sun
    Fig. 9. BSR of spot array diagram with different off-axis angles of the sun
    Light spot array in different BSR environments
    Fig. 10. Light spot array in different BSR environments
    Results of each method under different BSR conditions
    Fig. 11. Results of each method under different BSR conditions
    Optical path diagram of the experimental system
    Fig. 12. Optical path diagram of the experimental system
    The denoising results of each method are obtained when there is only background noise
    Fig. 13. The denoising results of each method are obtained when there is only background noise
    The influence of actual sub-spot on surface fitting results
    Fig. 14. The influence of actual sub-spot on surface fitting results
    Image processing results with both background noise and light spots
    Fig. 15. Image processing results with both background noise and light spots
    Experimental results of background separation of spot array image
    Fig. 16. Experimental results of background separation of spot array image
    Wavefront restoration results of each method
    Fig. 17. Wavefront restoration results of each method
    Error in centroid calculation of 200 experimental data
    Fig. 18. Error in centroid calculation of 200 experimental data
    Specific situationMore control pointLess control pointControl point on the spotControl point not on the spot
    SSIM0.200 90.088 10.132 20.132 2
    Table 1. The influence of the position and number of control points on structural similarity
    Wavelength/nmPixel size/μmNumber of sub-aperturesTarget pixelNumber of effective sub-aperturesFocal length/cm
    6356.416×16992×9921924.23
    Table 2. Simulation parameters
    MethodIMPSBS
    RMS/Gray value0.003 00.017 50.017 3
    Table 3. Residual RMS fitted by each method
    MethodIMPSBS
    Mean value/Gray value0.162 00.695 00.177 0
    Table 4. The mean error of each method's fitting results
    MethodIMPSBS
    Peak light intensity/Gray value1.1×1041.015 1×1078.052×106
    Table 5. Peak light intensity of the affected photon spot
    MethodIMPSBS
    SSIM4.5×10-50.440.30
    Table 6. The structural similarity between the affected and unaffected sub-spots
    MethodPSIMWindowingATBS
    RMS/λ0.045 80.043 20.039 10.139 00.025 2
    Table 7. Wavefront residual RMS recovered by different methods
    Wavelength/nmPixel size/μmNumber of sub-aperturesTarget pixelNumber of effective sub-aperturesFocal length/cmMicrolens array size/μm
    6356.416×16992×9921924.23396.8
    Table 8. Parameters of the experimental device
    MethodIMPSBS
    RMS/gray value0.056 00.438 00.416 2
    Table 9. The residual RMS was fitted to the data collected by each method
    MethodIMPSBS
    Peak light intensity/gray value0.73853.7143.54
    Table 10. The peak light intensity after the real photon spot is affected
    Han GUO, Wang ZHAO, Shuai WANG, Ping YANG, Lisong YAN, Shenghu LIU, Hongli GUAN, Chensi ZHAO. Subspot Background Noise Removal Method Based on Bezier Surface Fitting[J]. Acta Photonica Sinica, 2024, 53(8): 0801003
    Download Citation