研究目的
Evaluating the performance of the Complex Master Slave (CMS) method in spectral domain interferometry for distance measurement and optical coherence tomography, comparing it with the conventional Fourier transform-based method (PCDC).
研究成果
Both CMS and PCDC methods provide similar axial resolutions and sensitivities in spectral domain interferometry, with CMS offering advantages in calibration stability, tolerance to OPD choice, and real-time processing for limited axial points. CMS is more flexible and efficient for applications requiring sparse data or specific depth ranges, such as distance measurement or optical coherence microscopy, but it demands parallel processing and may be slower for large data sets. The findings are applicable to various SDI systems, with potential for further optimization and integration into practical devices.
研究不足
The study is limited to a spectrometer-based instrument with a specific camera (2048 pixels), which restricts the axial range to 2 mm. The methods may perform differently with other hardware configurations, such as swept-source systems or cameras with more pixels. CMS requires parallel processing for efficiency, which might not be feasible without optimized computational resources. Calibration stability over time shows degradation, especially for PCDC. The comparison does not include all possible software optimizations or digital enhancement techniques for sensitivity at depth.
1：Experimental Design and Method Selection:
The study compares two methods for processing spectra in spectral domain interferometry: the Complex Master Slave (CMS) method and the phase calibration with dispersion compensation (PCDC) method. CMS avoids Fourier transforms by using matrix multiplications with theoretically inferred spectra, while PCDC involves resampling, dispersion compensation, and FFT.
2：Sample Selection and Data Sources:
Experimental spectra were collected using a spectrometer-based instrument with a supercontinuum source. Calibration was performed using a flat mirror as the sample to simulate layers or corner cubes. Data included spectra at various optical path differences (OPDs).
3：List of Experimental Equipment and Materials:
A supercontinuum broadband light source (SuperK Extreme, NKT Photonics), a commercial spectrometer (Cobra 1300, Wasatch Photonics) with a Sensors Unlimited GL2048 linear InGaAs camera, achromatic lenses, a telecentric scan lens, and flat mirrors for reference and sample.
4：Experimental Procedures and Operational Workflow:
Calibration involved recording spectra at two OPD values to compute functions g and h for nonlinearity and dispersion. For PCDC, spectra were resampled, multiplied by a phase factor, and FFT-applied. For CMS, dot products between acquired spectra and theoretically inferred masks were computed. Axial resolutions, sensitivity drop-offs, and processing times were measured and compared.
5：Data Analysis Methods:
Data were analyzed using LabVIEW 2017 for benchmarking processing times. Axial resolution was evaluated using full-width-at-half-maximum (FWHM) of peaks from A-scans. Sensitivity was normalized and compared between methods.
独家科研数据包，助您复现前沿成果，加速创新突破
获取完整内容
