pith. sign in

arxiv: 2507.19150 · v2 · submitted 2025-07-25 · 🌌 astro-ph.IM · math.OC

Wavefront super-resolution for Adaptive Optics systems on ground-based telescopes

Yutong Wu , Roland Wagner , Ronny Ramlau , Raymond H. Chan This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 03:26 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.IM math.OC
keywords adaptive opticswavefront reconstructionmulti-frame super-resolutionTaylor frozen flow hypothesisvon Karman turbulenceH2 regularizationground-based telescopes
0
0 comments X

The pith

A reconstruction model fuses multi-frame gradients from multiple wavefront sensors to recover high-resolution phases using turbulence statistics and wind velocities.

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

The paper proposes a model for reconstructing a high-resolution wavefront from a sequence of wavefront gradient data from multiple WFSs in a multi-frame post-processing setting. This model incorporates turbulence statistics and the Taylor frozen flow hypothesis along with knowledge of wind velocities in atmospheric turbulence layers. An H2 regularization term is added for von Karman statistics, accompanied by a theoretical analysis showing the solution space as H^2 within H^{11/6}. Simulations demonstrate the robustness of this approach compared to single-WFS methods.

Core claim

We propose a model for reconstructing a high-resolution wavefront from a sequence of wavefront gradient data from multiple WFSs in a multi-frame post-processing setting. Our model is based on the turbulence statistics and the Taylor frozen flow hypothesis, incorporating knowledge of the wind velocities in atmospheric turbulence layers. We also introduce an H2 regularization term, especially for atmospheric characteristics under von Karman statistics, and provide a theoretical analysis for H^2 space within H^{11/6}.

What carries the argument

Multi-WFS multi-frame fusion model grounded in Taylor frozen flow hypothesis with known wind velocities, plus H2 regularization tailored to von Karman statistics in H^{11/6} space.

If this is right

  • Known wind velocities allow temporal alignment of gradient sequences from several sensors into one consistent high-resolution wavefront estimate.
  • The H2 regularization stabilizes the inverse problem specifically when turbulence follows von Karman statistics.
  • Data from multiple WFSs under identical conditions yields more robust phase recovery than single-WFS reconstructions.
  • The functional analysis confirms that the regularized solution resides in the Sobolev space H^{11/6}.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The post-processing fusion could be retrofitted to existing adaptive-optics hardware to raise image quality without adding sensors.
  • Joint estimation of wind velocities alongside the phase might be needed when velocity priors are uncertain.
  • Real-time variants could fold the multi-frame idea into live correction loops during observations.
  • The same frozen-flow fusion principle might transfer to other moving-medium imaging tasks outside astronomy.

Load-bearing premise

The reconstruction requires accurate prior knowledge of wind velocities in the atmospheric turbulence layers together with the validity of the Taylor frozen flow hypothesis over the relevant time scales.

What would settle it

Run a controlled simulation with known ground-truth high-resolution phase where the input wind velocities are deliberately offset by 15 percent from truth and measure whether the reconstruction error rises sharply compared to the matched-velocity case.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.19150 by Raymond H. Chan, Roland Wagner, Ronny Ramlau, Yutong Wu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Working principle of Shack Hartman WFS. The offsets [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Visualization of WFS observations: the horizontal wavefront gradient (left), and the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: An exaggerated illustration of the multi-WFS model to show the relationship clearly: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The positional relationship from a top-view perspective. The right figure illustrates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The grid of ϕ 1 0 is shifted by d p t to ϕ p t , resulting in a configuration where it no longer aligns precisely with the grid (i.e., involving fractional movement). To delineate this fractional movement, the displaced field ϕ p t is interpolated onto the grid of ϕ 1 1 by integral movement ⌊d p t x ⌋ and ⌊d p t y ⌋, and fractional movement d p t x − ⌊d p t x ⌋ and d p t y − ⌊d p t y ⌋. Problem (10) is sim… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Field of view and frame index. To ensure the image’s applicability under various [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The L2 relative error and H1 relative error of the reconstruction. In [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The L2 relative error and H1 relative error of the reconstruction. This is a zoom into [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Visualization of phase residual errors for frame 3. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Magnified visualization of the reconstructed wavefront. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Detailed visualization of the reconstructed phase. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Two cases we considered in our estimation of our model. a) Examining how our [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The mean L2 and H1 error under different wind directions and speeds. relative to those on the two sides. Previous [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Visualization of phase residual errors for frame 3 under wind directions at 0 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: The reconstruction results under various WFS positions are shown for a wind speed of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: The reconstruction results under various WFS positions are shown for a wind speed of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: On the left hand, explains the visualization of the reference frame and the trajectory [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: The plots show the mean relative error among all frames under different reference frames. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_18.png] view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: The comparison between single and multi-WFS strategies is demonstrated using a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_19.png] view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Mean L2 relative error and H1 relative error under different wind conditions in different noise levels [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_20.png] view at source ↗
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: L2 relative error among all the detected areas under various wind directions. The left figure represents the single-WFS mode, and the right figure indicates the multi-WFS mode. Both figures have the same vertical scale to emphasize the difference in model performance between the two modes. 23 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_21.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In ground-based astronomy, Adaptive Optics (AO) is a pivotal technique, engineered to correct wavefront phase distortions and thereby enhance the quality of the observed images. Integral to an AO system is the wavefront sensor (WFS), which is crucial for detecting wavefront aberrations from guide stars, essential for phase calculations. Many models based on a single-WFS model have been proposed to obtain the high-resolution phase of the incoming wavefront. In this paper, we delve into the realm of multiple WFSs within the framework of state-of-the-art telescope setups for high-resolution phase reconstruction. We propose a model for reconstructing a high-resolution wavefront from a sequence of wavefront gradient data from multiple WFSs in a multi-frame post-processing setting. Our model is based on the turbulence statistics and the Taylor frozen flow hypothesis, incorporating knowledge of the wind velocities in atmospheric turbulence layers. We also introduce an $H_2$ regularization term, especially for atmospheric characteristics under von Karman statistics, and provide a theoretical analysis for $H^2$ space within $H^{11/6}$. Numerical simulations are conducted to demonstrate the robustness and effectiveness of our regularization term and multi-WFS reconstruction strategy under identical experimental conditions.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a model for high-resolution wavefront reconstruction in adaptive optics using sequences of gradient measurements from multiple wavefront sensors in a multi-frame post-processing setting. The approach incorporates turbulence statistics and the Taylor frozen-flow hypothesis with known wind velocities for atmospheric layers, introduces an H₂ regularization term suited to von Karman statistics, provides a theoretical analysis of H² embedding within H^{11/6}, and reports numerical simulations demonstrating robustness under identical conditions.

Significance. If the central assumptions hold and the method can be quantitatively validated, the work could contribute a physically motivated super-resolution technique for AO post-processing that leverages multi-sensor and temporal data. The explicit use of external turbulence priors and a tailored regularization term represents a constructive direction, though the absence of detailed performance metrics currently limits evaluation of its practical advantage over existing single-WFS approaches.

major comments (3)
  1. [Numerical simulations] Numerical simulations section: the abstract states that simulations demonstrate robustness and effectiveness, yet no error bars, quantitative metrics (RMS wavefront error, Strehl ratio, etc.), simulation parameters (frame count, r₀, WFS geometry, noise levels), or direct comparisons against single-WFS baselines are supplied. This omission prevents assessment of whether the multi-frame fusion actually improves reconstruction.
  2. [Model formulation] Model formulation (forward model and reconstruction equations): the linear mapping from measured gradients to high-resolution phase is derived under the assumption of exact layer wind velocities and strict Taylor frozen-flow validity over the multi-frame interval. No sensitivity analysis to velocity mismatch or temporal decorrelation is presented; any violation directly invalidates the inverse problem being solved by the subsequent H₂-regularized estimator.
  3. [Theoretical analysis] Theoretical analysis section: the claim of an H² space embedded within H^{11/6} for von Karman statistics is asserted to justify the regularization term, but the derivation, key steps, or proof are not shown. Without this material the regularization choice remains heuristic rather than theoretically grounded.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the phrase 'under identical experimental conditions' is used without defining the conditions or referencing the relevant simulation parameters.
  2. [Regularization term] Notation: the precise definition of the H₂ term and the value or selection method for its regularization parameter are not stated explicitly, complicating reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed comments on our manuscript. We have carefully reviewed each major point and provide point-by-point responses below. Where appropriate, we indicate the revisions that will be incorporated into the next version of the paper.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Numerical simulations section: the abstract states that simulations demonstrate robustness and effectiveness, yet no error bars, quantitative metrics (RMS wavefront error, Strehl ratio, etc.), simulation parameters (frame count, r₀, WFS geometry, noise levels), or direct comparisons against single-WFS baselines are supplied. This omission prevents assessment of whether the multi-frame fusion actually improves reconstruction.

    Authors: We agree that the numerical results section requires additional quantitative detail to enable direct evaluation of the proposed method. In the revised manuscript we will expand this section to include: (i) explicit simulation parameters (number of frames, r₀ values, WFS geometries, noise levels), (ii) RMS wavefront error and Strehl ratio metrics with error bars obtained from multiple turbulence realizations, and (iii) side-by-side comparisons against single-WFS reconstruction baselines under identical conditions. These additions will be presented in updated tables and figures. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Model formulation (forward model and reconstruction equations): the linear mapping from measured gradients to high-resolution phase is derived under the assumption of exact layer wind velocities and strict Taylor frozen-flow validity over the multi-frame interval. No sensitivity analysis to velocity mismatch or temporal decorrelation is presented; any violation directly invalidates the inverse problem being solved by the subsequent H₂-regularized estimator.

    Authors: The referee correctly notes that the forward model relies on known wind velocities and the Taylor frozen-flow hypothesis. These assumptions are standard in multi-frame AO reconstruction literature, yet we acknowledge that a dedicated sensitivity study is missing. In the revision we will add a new subsection that quantifies reconstruction degradation under small velocity mismatches (e.g., ±10 % and ±20 % perturbations) and under controlled temporal decorrelation, thereby demonstrating the practical robustness of the H₂-regularized estimator. revision: yes

  3. Referee: Theoretical analysis section: the claim of an H² space embedded within H^{11/6} for von Karman statistics is asserted to justify the regularization term, but the derivation, key steps, or proof are not shown. Without this material the regularization choice remains heuristic rather than theoretically grounded.

    Authors: We agree that the theoretical justification for the H₂ regularization term should be presented with explicit derivation steps. In the revised manuscript we will expand the theoretical analysis section to include the key mathematical steps establishing the continuous embedding of H² into H^{11/6} under von Karman turbulence statistics, together with the relevant Sobolev-space arguments that motivate the choice of regularization. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Derivation chain uses external turbulence priors and known velocities without self-referential reduction

full rationale

The paper's model for high-resolution wavefront reconstruction is explicitly constructed from established turbulence statistics, the Taylor frozen-flow hypothesis, and supplied wind-velocity vectors as independent inputs. The H2 regularization term and its embedding in H^{11/6} for von Karman statistics are presented as an added theoretical contribution rather than a quantity fitted to the target data or derived from a self-citation chain. No equation or step is shown to equate a claimed prediction back to a fitted parameter or to a prior result whose only justification is the present authors' own work. The forward model therefore remains falsifiable against external benchmarks (measured wind profiles, independent turbulence characterizations) and does not collapse to its own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The reconstruction equations rest on the Taylor frozen-flow hypothesis, von Karman turbulence statistics, and the assumption that wind velocities are known a priori. No free parameters are explicitly named in the abstract, but the H2 regularization weight is likely tuned. No new physical entities are introduced.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Taylor frozen flow hypothesis holds for the relevant time scales and turbulence layers
    Invoked to relate multi-frame gradient measurements to a single high-resolution phase screen via wind advection.
  • domain assumption Atmospheric turbulence obeys von Karman statistics
    Used to justify the specific form of the H2 regularization term and the H^{11/6} space analysis.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5747 in / 1565 out tokens · 39319 ms · 2026-05-19T03:26:55.090507+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Sobolev spaces

    Robert A Adams and John JF Fournier. Sobolev spaces. Elsevier, 2003

    work page 2003

  2. [2]

    Wavefront reconstruction methods for adaptive optics systems on ground-based telescopes

    Johnathan M Bardsley. “Wavefront reconstruction methods for adaptive optics systems on ground-based telescopes”. In: SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications 30.1 (2008), pp. 67–83

    work page 2008

  3. [3]

    Frozen flow or not? Investigating the predictability of the atmo- sphere

    Nazim Ali Bharmal. “Frozen flow or not? Investigating the predictability of the atmo- sphere”. In: Journal of Physics: Conference Series . Vol. 595. 1. IOP Publishing. 2015, p. 012003

    work page 2015

  4. [4]

    High-resolution image reconstruction with multisensors

    NK Bose and KJ Boo. “High-resolution image reconstruction with multisensors”. In: International Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology 9.4 (1998), pp. 294–304

    work page 1998

  5. [5]

    A two-stage image segmentation method using a convex variant of the Mumford–Shah model and thresholding

    Xiaohao Cai, Raymond Chan, and Tieyong Zeng. “A two-stage image segmentation method using a convex variant of the Mumford–Shah model and thresholding”. In: SIAM Journal on Imaging Sciences 6.1 (2013), pp. 368–390

    work page 2013

  6. [6]

    Wavelet algorithms for high-resolution image reconstruction

    Raymond H Chan, Tony F Chan, Lixin Shen, and Zuowei Shen. “Wavelet algorithms for high-resolution image reconstruction”. In: SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing 24.4 (2003), pp. 1408–1432

    work page 2003

  7. [7]

    A phase model for point spread function estimation in ground-based astronomy

    Raymond Honfu Chan, XiaoMing Yuan, and WenXing Zhang. “A phase model for point spread function estimation in ground-based astronomy”. In: Science China Mathematics 56 (2013), pp. 2701–2710

    work page 2013

  8. [8]

    SIAM, 2005

    Tony F Chan and Jianhong Shen.Image processing and analysis: variational, PDE, wavelet, and stochastic methods. SIAM, 2005

    work page 2005

  9. [9]

    MAORY/MORFEO at ELT: general overview up to the preliminary design and a look towards the final design

    Paolo Ciliegi, Guido Agapito, and Matteo Aliverti et al. “MAORY/MORFEO at ELT: general overview up to the preliminary design and a look towards the final design”. In: Adaptive Optics Systems VIII . Ed. by Laura Schreiber, Dirk Schmidt, and Elise Vernet. Vol. 12185. International Society for Optics and Photonics. SPIE, 2022, p. 1218514. doi: 10.1117/12.262...

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2628969 2022

  10. [10]

    Turbulence: an introduction for scientists and engineers

    Peter Alan Davidson. Turbulence: an introduction for scientists and engineers . Oxford university press, 2015

    work page 2015

  11. [11]

    Adaptive optics for astronomy

    Richard Davies and Markus Kasper. “Adaptive optics for astronomy”. In: Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 50.1 (2012), pp. 305–351

    work page 2012

  12. [12]

    Hitchhiker’s guide to the fractional Sobolev spaces

    Eleonora Di Nezza, Giampiero Palatucci, and Enrico Valdinoci. “Hitchhiker’s guide to the fractional Sobolev spaces”. In: Bulletin des sciences math´ ematiques 136.5 (2012), pp. 521–573

    work page 2012

  13. [13]

    Optimal wave-front reconstruction strategies for multi conjugate adaptive optics

    T. Fusco, J.-M. Conan, G. Rousset, L.M. Mugnier, and V. Michau. “Optimal wave-front reconstruction strategies for multi conjugate adaptive optics”. In: J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 18.10 (2001), pp. 2527–2538

    work page 2001

  14. [14]

    Introduction to Fourier optics

    Joseph W Goodman. Introduction to Fourier optics. Roberts and Company publishers, 2005

    work page 2005

  15. [15]

    Statistical optics

    Joseph W Goodman. “Statistical optics”. In: Journal of the Optical Society of America A 2.9 (1985), pp. 1448–1454

    work page 1985

  16. [16]

    Wavelet methods in multi-conjugate adaptive optics

    T. Helin and M. Yudytskiy. “Wavelet methods in multi-conjugate adaptive optics”. In: Inverse Problems 29.8 (July 2013), p. 085003. doi: 10.1088/0266-5611/29/8/085003. 25

    work page doi:10.1088/0266-5611/29/8/085003 2013

  17. [17]

    Review of optical scintillation methods of measuring the refractive-index spectrum, inner scale and surface fluxes

    Reginald J Hill. “Review of optical scintillation methods of measuring the refractive-index spectrum, inner scale and surface fluxes”. In: Waves in Random Media 2.3 (1992), p. 179

    work page 1992

  18. [18]

    Spectra of fluctuations in refractivity, temperature, humidity, and the temperature- humidity cospectrum in the inertial and dissipation ranges

    RJ Hill. “Spectra of fluctuations in refractivity, temperature, humidity, and the temperature- humidity cospectrum in the inertial and dissipation ranges”. In: Radio Science 13.6 (1978), pp. 953–961

    work page 1978

  19. [19]

    Reconstruction of the high resolution phase in a closed loop adaptive optics system

    Rihuan Ke, Roland Wagner, Ronny Ramlau, and Raymond Chan. “Reconstruction of the high resolution phase in a closed loop adaptive optics system”. In: SIAM Journal on Imaging Sciences 13.2 (2020), pp. 775–806

    work page 2020

  20. [20]

    Fast PSF reconstruction using the frozen flow hypothesis

    James Nagy, Stuart Jefferies, and Qing Chu. “Fast PSF reconstruction using the frozen flow hypothesis”. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance Technologies Conference. 2010, pp. 13–16

    work page 2010

  21. [21]

    History and principles of Shack-Hartmann wavefront sensing

    Ben C Platt and Ronald Shack. History and principles of Shack-Hartmann wavefront sensing. 2001

    work page 2001

  22. [22]

    The telescope point spread function

    Rene Racine. “The telescope point spread function”. In: Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 108.726 (1996), p. 699

    work page 1996

  23. [23]

    An augmented wavelet reconstructor for atmospheric tomog- raphy

    R. Ramlau and B. Stadler. “An augmented wavelet reconstructor for atmospheric tomog- raphy”. In: Electronic Transactions on Numerical Analysis (ETNA) 54 (2021), pp. 256– 275

    work page 2021

  24. [24]

    Adaptive optics in astronomy

    Fran¸ cois Roddier. “Adaptive optics in astronomy”. In: (1999)

    work page 1999

  25. [25]

    The effects of atmospheric turbulence in optical astronomy

    Fran¸ cois Roddier. “The effects of atmospheric turbulence in optical astronomy”. In: Progress in optics. Vol. 19. Elsevier, 1981, pp. 281–376

    work page 1981

  26. [26]

    Imaging through turbulence

    Michael C Roggemann and Byron M Welsh. Imaging through turbulence. CRC press, 2018

    work page 2018

  27. [27]

    Wave-front sensors

    Gerard Rousset. “Wave-front sensors”. In: Adaptive optics in astronomy 1 (1999), p. 91

    work page 1999

  28. [28]

    Principles of mathematical analysis

    Walter Rudin et al. Principles of mathematical analysis . Vol. 3. McGraw-hill New York, 1964

    work page 1964

  29. [29]

    Production and use of a lenticular Hartmann screen

    Ronald Shack. “Production and use of a lenticular Hartmann screen”. In: J. Opt. Soc. Am. 61.656 (1971)

    work page 1971

  30. [30]

    The effects of the turbulent atmosphere on wave propagation

    Valerian Ilitch Tatarskii. “The effects of the turbulent atmosphere on wave propagation”. In: Jerusalem: Israel Program for Scientific Translations, 1971 (1971)

    work page 1971

  31. [31]

    The spectrum of turbulence

    Geoffrey Ingram Taylor. “The spectrum of turbulence”. In:Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A-Mathematical and Physical Sciences 164.919 (1938), pp. 476–490

    work page 1938

  32. [32]

    A first course in turbulence

    Hendrik Tennekes and John Leask Lumley. A first course in turbulence . MIT press, 1972

    work page 1972

  33. [33]

    On the stability of inverse problems

    Andrey Nikolayevich Tikhonov et al. “On the stability of inverse problems”. In: Dokl. akad. nauk sssr . Vol. 39. 5. 1943, pp. 195–198

    work page 1943

  34. [34]

    Multiframe image restoration and registration

    Roger Y Tsai and Thomas S Huang. “Multiframe image restoration and registration”. In: Multiframe image restoration and registration 1 (1984), pp. 317–339

    work page 1984

  35. [35]

    Theodore Von K´ arm´ an.Mechanical similitude and turbulence . 611. National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, 1931

    work page 1931

  36. [36]

    Direction dependent point spread function reconstruction for multi-conjugate adaptive optics on giant segmented mirror telescopes

    R. Wagner, D. Saxenhuber, R. Ramlau, and S. Hubmer. “Direction dependent point spread function reconstruction for multi-conjugate adaptive optics on giant segmented mirror telescopes”. In: Astronomy and Computing 40 (July 2022), p. 100590. doi: 10. 1016/j.ascom.2022.100590. 26

    work page arXiv 2022

  37. [37]

    Point spread function recon- struction for Single-conjugate Adaptive Optics

    Roland Wagner, Christoph Hofer, and Ronny Ramlau. “Point spread function recon- struction for Single-conjugate Adaptive Optics”. In: Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems 4.4 (2018), p. 049003. doi: 10.1117/1.JATIS.4.4.049003

    work page doi:10.1117/1.jatis.4.4.049003 2018

  38. [38]

    Off-axis point spread function reconstruction for single conjugate adaptive optics

    Roland Wagner, Jenny Niebsch, and Ronny Ramlau. “Off-axis point spread function reconstruction for single conjugate adaptive optics”. In: J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 40.7 (July 2023), pp. 1382–1391. doi: 10.1364/JOSAA.488843 . url: https://opg.optica.org/ josaa/abstract.cfm?URI=josaa-40-7-1382

    work page doi:10.1364/josaa.488843 2023

  39. [39]

    Atmospheric turbulence

    John C Wyngaard. “Atmospheric turbulence”. In: Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 24.1 (1992), pp. 205–234

    work page 1992

  40. [40]

    Finite element-wavelet hybrid algorithm for atmospheric tomography

    M. Yudytskiy, T. Helin, and R. Ramlau. “Finite element-wavelet hybrid algorithm for atmospheric tomography”. In: J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 31.3 (Mar. 2014), pp. 550–560. doi: 10.1364/JOSAA.31.000550 . url: http://josaa.osa.org/abstract.cfm?URI=josaa- 31-3-550

    work page doi:10.1364/josaa.31.000550 2014

  41. [41]

    Regularization and variable selection via the elastic net

    Hui Zou and Trevor Hastie. “Regularization and variable selection via the elastic net”. In: Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology 67.2 (2005), pp. 301–320. 27

    work page 2005