2018
DOI: 10.1364/boe.9.006302
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Experimental validations of a tunable-lens-based visual demonstrator of multifocal corrections

Abstract: The Simultaneous Vision simulator (SimVis) is a visual demonstrator of multifocal lens designs for prospective intraocular lens replacement surgery patients and contact lens wearers. This programmable device employs a fast tunable lens and works on the principle of temporal multiplexing. The SimVis input signal is tailored to mimic the optical quality of the multifocal lens using the theoretical SimVis temporal profile, which is evaluated from the through-focus Visual Strehl ratio metric of the multifocal lens… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
25
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

5
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
(29 reference statements)
0
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the case of the TF logMAR VA, depth of focus (DOF) was defined as the range of defocus over which the VA is within the 0.2 logMAR of the subject's best possible acuity, following the procedure by Collins et al, 41 which corresponds to a visual Strehl of approximately 0.12. 33,42 The comparison between the real and the SimVissimulated TF performance was expressed in terms of RMS difference of the linearly interpolated TF curves (in a 4.00 D range), taking the real MCLs as the reference. The RMS difference served as a metric for the goodness of the replication of the lens design by the SimVis simulator.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In the case of the TF logMAR VA, depth of focus (DOF) was defined as the range of defocus over which the VA is within the 0.2 logMAR of the subject's best possible acuity, following the procedure by Collins et al, 41 which corresponds to a visual Strehl of approximately 0.12. 33,42 The comparison between the real and the SimVissimulated TF performance was expressed in terms of RMS difference of the linearly interpolated TF curves (in a 4.00 D range), taking the real MCLs as the reference. The RMS difference served as a metric for the goodness of the replication of the lens design by the SimVis simulator.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other differences between performance of physical contact lenses and the simulations may arise from tear film, contact lens fitting or decentrations (not present in SimVis) and mismatch between pupil size. Also, in previous publications (Akondi et al 24,33 ) we discussed limitations to the fact that SimVis relies on temporal multiplexing to represent a spatial variation in the multifocal lens. While the evaluation in prior work was done for intraocular lenses, several conclusions can be extrapolated to contact lenses, particularly regarding the effect of ocular aberrations and pupil size in refractive lens designs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The focimeter was also used to experimentally measure the output response, that was successfully compared with the predictions of the model. A numerical optimization [35] demonstrated that the compensation of transient response is possible, and experimental measurements proved that applying this compensation represents a significant improvement in the performance of tunable lenses working at high speed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The final strategy to compensate the transient response was based on automatically generating input waves of higher complexity, using an optimization algorithm (implementing the linear model described in 2.1) to minimize the deviations in the predicted response of the lens [35]. In particular, we minimized the root mean square error between the theoretically estimated response and the target curve, with constrains: the maximum and minimum optical power available, the temporal resolution of the device (Section 2.2) and the sampling of the optical power dynamic range.…”
Section: Model Validation and Compensation Of Transient Responsementioning
confidence: 99%