Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2018: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave 2018
DOI: 10.1117/12.2307858
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Smart starting guesses from machine learning for phase retrieval

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Over the last years, deep learning-based approaches using convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have proven to be powerful and computationally efficient for image-based classification and regression tasks for microscopy images [18,19]. Recently, several studies demonstrated that deep learning-based phase retrieval can produce accurate results at fast processing speeds [20][21][22][23][24][25], however they fall short regarding their practical applicability. Some of these approaches [22][23][24] used purely simulated synthetic data, where generalizability to real microscopy images is unclear.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Over the last years, deep learning-based approaches using convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have proven to be powerful and computationally efficient for image-based classification and regression tasks for microscopy images [18,19]. Recently, several studies demonstrated that deep learning-based phase retrieval can produce accurate results at fast processing speeds [20][21][22][23][24][25], however they fall short regarding their practical applicability. Some of these approaches [22][23][24] used purely simulated synthetic data, where generalizability to real microscopy images is unclear.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, several studies demonstrated that deep learning-based phase retrieval can produce accurate results at fast processing speeds [20][21][22][23][24][25], however they fall short regarding their practical applicability. Some of these approaches [22][23][24] used purely simulated synthetic data, where generalizability to real microscopy images is unclear. Others focused on specific microscopy acquisition modes (such as using biplanar PSFs [20]) or microscopy setups that allow to collect large sets of experimental ground truth data for training and prediction [21,25], thus limiting this approach in practice.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additional body work has been done using convolutional neural nets, such as prDeep [26], leading to a separate class of architectures not versatile enough to improve the existing algorithms. In fact, some of Fienup's recent work for space telescopes take advantage of smart initializations obtained from convolutional neural nets for phase retrieval [27]. The said limitations directly relate to the two major pitfalls of data-driven approaches, i.e., (i) their need to a relatively large amount of data for training purposes and (ii) their inherent lack of interpretability, even after training.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Over the last years, deep learning based approaches using convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have proven to be powerful and computationally efficient for image-based classification and regression tasks for microscopy images [17,18]. Recently, several studies demonstrated that deep learning based phase retrieval can produce accurate results at fast processing speeds [19][20][21][22], however they fall short regarding their practical applicability. Some of these approaches [21,22] used purely simulated synthetic data, where generalizability to real microscopy images is unclear.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, several studies demonstrated that deep learning based phase retrieval can produce accurate results at fast processing speeds [19][20][21][22], however they fall short regarding their practical applicability. Some of these approaches [21,22] used purely simulated synthetic data, where generalizability to real microscopy images is unclear. Others [19,20] focused on specific microscopy modalities where it is feasible to collect large sets of experimental ground truth data for training and prediction, thus limiting this approach in practice.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%