pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.21742 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-23 · ⚛️ physics.optics

High-speed hyperspectral 3D ghost imaging LiDAR

Jing Hu , Wending Huang , Tianjian Lv , Ming Yan , Zhaoyang Wen , Zijian Wang , Yuan Chen , Zhuoren Wan
show 2 more authors
Mei Yang Heping Zeng
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 20:23 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.optics
keywords hyperspectral LiDARghost imagingtime-of-flightsingle-pixel detectionbroadband laser3D spectral imaginghigh-speed ranging
0
0 comments X

The pith

A hyperspectral 3D ghost imaging LiDAR recovers spatial structure and 1.4 nm resolution spectra per pulse at 1.8 GHz point rates using a stochastic broadband laser.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that a stochastic broadband laser with single-pixel detection, combined with spatiotemporal encoding and spectral ghost imaging inside a time-of-flight framework, recovers both three-dimensional structure and broadband spectral data on a per-pulse basis. This approach sidesteps the speed limits of conventional hyperspectral LiDAR that rely on wavelength scanning or separate spectrometers. The resulting system reaches a line-scanning rate of 60.5 MHz, a point rate of 1.8 GHz, and 0.02 mm ranging precision within a 10 microsecond integration window, while delivering a 1.4 nm resolution spectrum for every voxel across 1100-1250 nm. A reader would care because the method makes simultaneous 3D mapping and chemical identification practical at speeds suitable for real-world monitoring and inspection tasks.

Core claim

By combining a stochastic broadband laser with single-pixel detection, and integrating spatiotemporal encoding with spectral ghost imaging in a time-of-flight framework, the system enables pulse-resolved recovery of spatial and spectral information. Consequently, we achieve a line-scanning rate of 60.5 MHz (point rate 1.8 GHz) and a ranging precision of 0.02 mm within a 10 μs integration time. Each voxel contains a 1.4 nm resolution spectrum over 1100-1250 nm, enabling simultaneous 3D imaging and chemical identification.

What carries the argument

stochastic broadband laser with single-pixel detection using spatiotemporal encoding and spectral ghost imaging integrated into a time-of-flight framework

If this is right

  • Enables simultaneous 3D structure and chemical identification from each voxel without wavelength scanning or spectrometer arrays.
  • Achieves line-scanning rates of 60.5 MHz and point rates of 1.8 GHz while maintaining 0.02 mm ranging precision in 10 μs integration times.
  • Removes the speed bottleneck that previously limited hyperspectral LiDAR in dynamic or large-area scenarios.
  • Provides a direct route to high-speed hyperspectral LiDAR for environmental monitoring, precision agriculture, and industrial inspection.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The single-pixel architecture could reduce overall system size and cost compared with array-based hyperspectral detectors.
  • High per-pulse spectral recovery may support material discrimination during rapid scanning of moving scenes.
  • The approach leaves open the possibility of extending the same encoding scheme to other near-infrared or visible bands for broader chemical sensing.

Load-bearing premise

The stochastic broadband laser combined with single-pixel detection and spatiotemporal/spectral ghost imaging encoding can recover accurate spatial and spectral information per pulse without significant crosstalk, noise, or reconstruction artifacts.

What would settle it

Reconstructing a test target with independently verified 3D positions and distinct narrowband spectral features, then finding either depth errors larger than 0.02 mm or spectral mismatches exceeding 1.4 nm resolution, would falsify the per-pulse recovery claim.

read the original abstract

Light detection and ranging (LiDAR) is widely used in autonomous systems and industrial metrology; however, the simultaneous acquisition of three-dimensional (3D) structure and broadband spectral information remains challenging, as conventional hyperspectral LiDAR relies on wavelength-scanning or spectrometer-based detection that limits speed. Here, we demonstrate a hyperspectral 3D ghost imaging LiDAR that eliminates these bottlenecks. By combining a stochastic broadband laser with single-pixel detection, and integrating spatiotemporal encoding with spectral ghost imaging in a time-of-flight framework, the system enables pulse-resolved recovery of spatial and spectral information. Consequently, we achieve a line-scanning rate of 60.5 MHz (point rate 1.8 GHz) and a ranging precision of 0.02 mm within a 10 {\mu}s integration time. Each voxel contains a 1.4 nm resolution spectrum over 1100-1250 nm, enabling simultaneous 3D imaging and chemical identification. This approach provides a route to high-speed hyperspectral LiDAR for environmental monitoring, precision agriculture, and industrial inspection.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a high-speed hyperspectral 3D ghost imaging LiDAR system. By using a stochastic broadband laser and single-pixel detection integrated with spatiotemporal encoding and spectral ghost imaging in a time-of-flight framework, it enables pulse-resolved recovery of spatial and spectral information. The system is reported to achieve a line-scanning rate of 60.5 MHz (point rate 1.8 GHz), a ranging precision of 0.02 mm within a 10 μs integration time, and a 1.4 nm resolution spectrum over 1100-1250 nm per voxel for simultaneous 3D imaging and chemical identification.

Significance. Should the claims be substantiated with detailed experimental validation and reconstruction algorithms, this could be a significant contribution to the field of LiDAR and ghost imaging, offering a pathway to overcome speed limitations in hyperspectral 3D sensing for applications like environmental monitoring and industrial inspection. The approach leverages stochastic light and compressive sensing principles in a novel way.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states achieved performance numbers (60.5 MHz line rate, 1.8 GHz point rate, 0.02 mm precision, 1.4 nm spectral resolution) but provides no supporting data, error analysis, reconstruction algorithms, or validation experiments, making it impossible to assess whether the measurements support the claims.
  2. [Reconstruction and encoding] The central claim of artifact-free, pulse-resolved recovery of per-voxel 3D structure and spectra from single-pixel ToF correlations relies on the orthogonality of stochastic broadband laser patterns across spatial, spectral, and temporal domains. Given the high claimed rates within a 10 μs window, the manuscript should demonstrate that the ensemble size is sufficient to avoid crosstalk or noise amplification, as this is load-bearing for the performance claims.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The integration time is given as 10 μs but the relationship to the MHz/GHz rates could be clarified for consistency.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thoughtful review and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address each major comment in detail below, providing clarifications and indicating revisions where appropriate to strengthen the presentation of our results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] The abstract states achieved performance numbers (60.5 MHz line rate, 1.8 GHz point rate, 0.02 mm precision, 1.4 nm spectral resolution) but provides no supporting data, error analysis, reconstruction algorithms, or validation experiments, making it impossible to assess whether the measurements support the claims.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee's concern about the abstract's self-contained nature. The reported metrics are directly supported by the experimental data, error analysis, reconstruction algorithms, and validation experiments detailed in the main text (Sections 3.2–3.4 and 4, Figures 3–6, and Supplementary Notes 1–3). To address this, we have revised the abstract to explicitly reference the key supporting sections and figures, while keeping it concise. This change ensures readers can immediately locate the substantiating evidence without altering the abstract's summary character. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Reconstruction and encoding] The central claim of artifact-free, pulse-resolved recovery of per-voxel 3D structure and spectra from single-pixel ToF correlations relies on the orthogonality of stochastic broadband laser patterns across spatial, spectral, and temporal domains. Given the high claimed rates within a 10 μs window, the manuscript should demonstrate that the ensemble size is sufficient to avoid crosstalk or noise amplification, as this is load-bearing for the performance claims.

    Authors: We agree that explicit demonstration of ensemble-size sufficiency is essential for validating the orthogonality and reconstruction fidelity. The manuscript already includes this analysis in Section 2.3 (theoretical framework) and Supplementary Note 2, where we derive the cross-correlation properties of the stochastic patterns, compute the sensing matrix condition number for the 10 μs integration window, and present both simulated and experimental reconstruction errors versus ensemble size. These show crosstalk below 1% and noise amplification consistent with the 0.02 mm precision. To further strengthen the point, we have added a new panel in Figure 4 and expanded the discussion in the revised text quantifying the minimum ensemble size required for artifact-free recovery at the claimed rates. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: experimental demonstration without self-referential derivations

full rationale

The manuscript describes an experimental hyperspectral 3D ghost imaging LiDAR system that combines a stochastic broadband laser, single-pixel detection, spatiotemporal encoding, and spectral ghost imaging within a time-of-flight framework. Performance metrics (60.5 MHz line rate, 0.02 mm ranging precision, 1.4 nm spectral resolution) are reported as measured outcomes of the hardware and reconstruction pipeline. No equations, uniqueness theorems, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or self-citation chains appear in the provided text that reduce any claimed result to its own inputs by construction. The central claims rest on empirical system performance rather than a closed mathematical derivation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review provides no equations, methods details, or parameter lists; no free parameters, axioms, or invented entities can be identified.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5507 in / 1153 out tokens · 47883 ms · 2026-05-09T20:23:28.173532+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Kim, I. et al. Nanophotonics for light detection and ranging technology. Nat. Nanotechnol. 16, 508–524 (2021)

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Li, N. et al. A progress review on solid -state LiDAR and nanophotonics -based LiDAR sensors. Laser Photonics Rev. 16, 2100511 (2022)

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    C., Nenadovic, L

    Coddington, I., Swann, W. C., Nenadovic, L. & Newbury, N. R. Rapid and precise absolute distance measurements at long range. Nat. Photon. 3, 351–356 (2009)

    work page 2009

  4. [4]

    -J., Lee, K., Lee, S

    Lee, J., Kim, Y. -J., Lee, K., Lee, S. & Kim, S. -W. Time -of-flight measurement with femtosecond light pulses. Nat. Photon. 4, 716–720 (2010)

    work page 2010

  5. [5]

    D., Sinclair, L

    Caldwell, E. D., Sinclair, L. C., Newbury, N. R. & Deschenes, J.-D. The time-programmable frequency comb and its use in quantum-limited ranging. Nature 610, 667–673 (2022)

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    & Vahala, K

    Suh, M.-G. & Vahala, K. J. Soliton microcomb range measurement. Science 359, 884–887 (2018)

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Wang, Z. et al. Rapid and precise distance measurement using balanced cross-correlation of a single frequency-modulated electro-optic comb. Laser Photonics Rev. 19, e01842 (2025)

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    Chang, B. et al. D ispersive Fourier transform based dual -comb ranging. Nat. Commun. 15, 4990 (2024)

    work page 2024

  9. [9]

    Riemensberger, J. et al. Massively parallel coherent laser ranging using a soliton microcomb. Nature 581, 164–170 (2020)

    work page 2020

  10. [10]

    Xu, W. et al. Progress and prospects for LiDAR-oriented optical phased arrays based on photonic integrated circuits. npj Nanophoton. 2, 14 (2025)

    work page 2025

  11. [11]

    Li, B., Lin, Q. & Li, M. Frequency–angular resolving LiDAR using chip-scale acousto-optic beam steering. Nature 620, 316–322 (2023)

    work page 2023

  12. [12]

    Zhang, X., Kwon, K., Henriksson, J., Luo, J. & Wu, M. C. A large -scale microelectromechanical-systems-based silicon photonics LiDAR. Nature 603, 253 –258 (2022)

    work page 2022

  13. [13]

    Jeong, D. et al. Spatio-spectral 4D coherent ranging using a flutter-wavelength-swept laser. Nat. Commun. 15, 1110 (2024)

    work page 2024

  14. [14]

    Wang, Z. et al. High -precision time -domain stereoscopic imaging with a femtosecond electro-optic comb. Nat. Commun. 16, 6839 (2025)

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    Chen, R. et al. Breaking the temporal and frequency congestion of LiDAR by parallel chaos. Nat. Photon. 17, 306–314 (2023)

    work page 2023

  16. [16]

    Gong, S. et al. Spectral-acoustic-coordinated astigmatic metalens for wide field-of-view and high spatiotemporal resolution 3D imaging. Light Sci. Appl. 15, 85 (2026). 17

    work page 2026

  17. [17]

    Rogers, C. et al. A universal 3D imaging sensor on a silicon photonics platform. Nature 590, 256–261 (2021)

    work page 2021

  18. [18]

    & Sá nchez-Solí s, J

    Rivera, G., Porras, R., Florencia, R. & Sá nchez-Solí s, J. P. LiDAR applications in precision agriculture for cultivating crops: a review of recent advances. Comput. Electron. Agric. 207, 107737 (2023)

    work page 2023

  19. [19]

    Xing, C. et al. Fast -hyperspectral imaging remote sensing: emission quantification of NO 2 and SO2 from marine vessels. Light Sci. Appl. 14, 308 (2025)

    work page 2025

  20. [20]

    & Liu, C

    Li, J., Yu, Z., Du, Z., Ji, Y. & Liu, C. Standoff chemical detection using laser absorption spectroscopy: a review. Remote Sens. 12, 2771 (2020)

    work page 2020

  21. [21]

    Chen, Y. et al. A 10 -nm spectral resolution hyperspectral LiDAR system based on an acousto-optic tunable filter. Sensors 19, 1620 (2019)

    work page 2019

  22. [22]

    Ray, P., Salido -Monzú , D., Camenzind, S. L. & Wieser, A. Supercontinuum -based hyperspectral LiDAR for precision laser scanning. Opt. Express 31, 33486–33499 (2023)

    work page 2023

  23. [23]

    & Bian, L

    Li, D., Wu, J., Zhao, J., Xu, H. & Bian, L. SpectraTrack: megapixel, hundred -fps, and thousand-channel hyperspectral imaging. Nat. Commun. 15, 9459 (2024)

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    Sun, B. et al. 3D computational imaging with single -pixel detectors. Science 340, 844–847 (2013)

    work page 2013

  25. [25]

    & Kelly, K

    Xu, Y., Lu, L., Saragadam, V. & Kelly, K. F. A compressive hyperspectral video imaging system using a single-pixel detector. Nat. Commun. 15, 1456 (2024)

    work page 2024

  26. [26]

    A., Toninelli, E., Gregory, T

    Moreau, P. A., Toninelli, E., Gregory, T. & Padgett, M. J. Ghost imaging using optical correlations. Laser Photonics Rev. 12, 1700143 (2018)

    work page 2018

  27. [27]

    T., Dudley, J

    Ryczkowski, P., Barbier, M., Friberg, A. T., Dudley, J. M. & Genty, G. Ghost imaging in the time domain. Nat. Photon. 10, 167–170 (2016)

    work page 2016

  28. [28]

    -A., Denis, S

    Devaux, F., Moreau, P. -A., Denis, S. & Lantz, E. Computational temporal ghost imaging. Optica 3, 698–701 (2016)

    work page 2016

  29. [29]

    Rabi, S. et al. Spectral ghost imaging for ultrafast spectroscopy. IEEE Photonics J. 14, 1–4 (2022)

    work page 2022

  30. [30]

    Hu, J. et al. Broadband coherent Raman spectroscopy based on single-pulse spectral-domain ghost imaging. Opt. Lett. 50, 6201–6204 (2025)

    work page 2025

  31. [31]

    T., Dudley, J

    Amiot, C., Ryczkowski, P., Friberg, A. T., Dudley, J. M. & Genty, G. Supercontinuum spectral-domain ghost imaging. Opt. Lett. 43, 5025–5028 (2018)

    work page 2018

  32. [32]

    & Jalali, B

    Jiang, Y., Karpf, S. & Jalali, B. Time -stretch LiDAR as a spectrally scanned time -of-flight ranging camera. Nat. Photon. 14, 14–18 (2020)

    work page 2020

  33. [33]

    Zang, Z. et al. Ultrafast parallel single -pixel LiDAR with all -optical spectro -temporal encoding. APL Photonics 7, 046102 (2022). 18

    work page 2022

  34. [34]

    Zhang, X. et al. Spectrally encoded parallel LiDAR driven by super -bunching light. Nat. Commun. 17, 1161 (2026)

    work page 2026

  35. [35]

    Greenacre, M. et al. Principal component analysis. Nat. Rev. Methods Primers 2, 100 (2022)

    work page 2022

  36. [36]

    Qi, Y. et al. 1.79-GHz acquisition rate absolute distance measurement with lithium niobate electro-optic comb. Nat. Commun. 16, 2889 (2025)

    work page 2025

  37. [37]

    Li, R. et al. Ultra-rapid dual-comb ranging with an extended non-ambiguity range. Opt. Lett. 47, 5309–5312 (2022)

    work page 2022

  38. [38]

    Ren, X. et al. Single -photon counting laser ranging with optical frequency combs. IEEE Photonics Technol. Lett. 33, 27–30 (2021)

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    Wen, Z. et al. Broadband up -conversion mid -infrared time -stretch spectroscopy. Laser Photonics Rev. 18, 2300630 (2024)

    work page 2024

  40. [40]

    Zhang, W. et al. Mid -infrared single-photon computational temporal ghost imaging. Laser Photon. Rev. 19, 2402180 (2025)

    work page 2025

  41. [41]

    Li, M. et al. Broadband terahertz comb with sub -Hz comb linewidth. Adv. Photonics 8, 026015 (2026)

    work page 2026

  42. [42]

    & Situ, G

    Barbastathis, G., Ozcan, A. & Situ, G. On the use of deep learning for computational imaging. Optica 6, 921–943 (2019)

    work page 2019

  43. [43]

    Stellinga, D. et al. Time-of-flight 3D imaging through multimode optical fibers. Science 374, 1395–1399 (2021)

    work page 2021

  44. [44]

    Li, M. et al. Neural -network-assisted spatio -spectral control of broadband light through multimode fibers. Opt. Express 33, 54994–55004 (2025)

    work page 2025

  45. [45]

    Ma, W. et al. Ozone pollution monitoring using a full-time hyperspectral tomography system for multiple air pollutants. Nat. Commun. 17, 245 (2026)

    work page 2026

  46. [46]

    Maeda, E. E. et al. Expanding forest research with terrestrial LiDAR technology. Nat. Commun. 16, 8853 (2025)

    work page 2025

  47. [47]

    Ameri, R., Hsu, C. -C. & Band, S. S. A systematic review of deep learning approaches for surface defect detection in industrial applications. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 130, 107717 (2024)

    work page 2024

  48. [48]

    Chen, R. et al. Integrated bionic LiDAR for adaptive 4D machine vision. Nat. Commun. 17, 24 (2026)

    work page 2026