Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 28 references

Single-shot focal plane wavefront sensing with the spatially-clipped self-coherent camera

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A spatially-clipped self-coherent camera senses focal-plane wavefront errors from a single exposure and, in monochromatic simulation, suppresses speckles to about 4e-10 normalized intensity in a 5-20 lambda/D dark hole—roughly 50x deeper th

desk verdict A genuinely new single-shot SCC layout with a promising simulation, but the measurement model has an unclosed pedestal-subtraction gap and the 50x speed claim rests on a simplified temporal model. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.03870 v1 pith:YGAIN3VR submitted 2025-09-04 astro-ph.IM astro-ph.EP

Joshua Liberman , Sebastiaan Y. Haffert , Jared R. Males , Kevin Derby , Ewan S. Douglas This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.IMastro-ph.EP
keywords exoplanetshighcontrastimagingwavefrontsensingcontrolself-coherentcameracoronagraphyspecklesuppressionHabitableWorldsObservatory
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper proposes a new layout of the self-coherent camera—a coronagraph that doubles as a focal-plane wavefront sensor—and claims it can read out the speckle field in one exposure. By placing the reference pinhole closer to the Lyot stop and splitting the beam with a knife-edge beamsplitter, the design forms an interference channel and a separate speckle-only channel; subtracting them leaves a fringe pattern that maps linearly to the complex speckle field. In monochromatic closed-loop simulations with a vortex coronagraph and a 52x52 deformable mirror, the method reaches a normalized intensity of about 4e-10 in a 5-20 lambda/D dark hole and, on time-varying speckles at short speckle lifetimes, about 50x deeper contrast than pairwise probing. If it holds up, this gives future space-based direct-imaging observatories a faster way to suppress quasi-static starlight speckles.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the spatially-clipped self-coherent camera: a Lyot stop with a small reference pinhole placed at 0.545 of the entrance-pupil diameter, followed by a knife-edge beamsplitter. The beamsplitter creates two simultaneous images—one where the pinhole-filtered reference interferes with the leaked speckle field (fringed channel) and one containing only the leaked speckle field (unfringed channel). The central identity is the subtracted image, Delta I = |E2|^2 + 2 Re{E1 E2*}; after dropping |E2|^2 under the weak-reference assumption, it is a linear map from the real and imaginary parts of E1 to pixel intensities. That linear map, calibrated by Fourier modes on the deformabl

What would settle it

Run the SCSCC-versus-PWP loop with a spatiotemporal power spectrum in which high-order speckles decorrelate faster than low-order ones rather than the separable same-for-all-frequencies spectrum, and record the contrast gap versus speckle lifetime; if the gap falls well below 50x, the speed claim is not general. Separately, measure the |E2|^2 term by comparing difference images with the reference pinhole open and blocked in a deep dark hole; if the term is not negligible, the single-shot estimator is biased.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The SCSCC is a spatially filtered, single-shot variant of the self-coherent camera. After the coronagraph mask, a pinhole close to the Lyot stop creates a reference beam; a knife-edge beamsplitter downstream sends the light to two channels. The fringed channel contains the interference between the leaked speckle field E1 and the reference E2; the unfringed channel contains only |E1|^2. Subtracting the channels removes the stellar halo, leaving |E2|^2 plus the cross-term 2Re(E1 E2*). The paper assumes E2 is much weaker than E1 and drops |E2|^2, so the measured difference becomes a linear function of the real and imaginary parts of the speckle field at every pixel. Calibrating Fourier modes on

Load-bearing premise

The central comparison rests on assuming every spatial-frequency speckle fluctuates with the same temporal correlation time, and that the reference beam's own intensity |E2|^2 is weak enough to drop; real instruments violate both assumptions to some degree, which would shrink the 50x advantage and bias the estimator.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A monochromatic closed loop with a scalar vortex coronagraph and a 52x52 deformable mirror reaches about 4e-10 normalized intensity in a 5-20 lambda/D dark hole, within the regime needed for Earth-like planet imaging.
  • In a temporally evolving speckle field, the single-shot SCSCC finishes about 50x deeper than pairwise probing for short speckle lifetimes, because time-varying aberrations are frozen in a single exposure.
  • Moving the reference pinhole closer to the Lyot stop yields roughly 2x better wavefront reconstruction sensitivity than the classical self-coherent camera at low photon flux.
  • The control loop remains stable only when differential aberrations between the fringed and unfringed channels stay below about 2 nm RMS, setting an optical-stability requirement for the concept.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: the 50x contrast advantage is likely tied to the simulation's assumption that every spatial frequency fluctuates with the same temporal correlation time; with realistic speckle lifetimes, where high-order speckles decorrelate faster, the advantage would probably shrink, though a single-shot sensor should still outperform sequential probing.
  • Editorial inference: the estimator's validity in a deep dark hole depends on the unstated removal of |E2|^2; if the reference is not much weaker than the residual speckle field, this term biases the wavefront estimate, so a useful test is to recompute the loop with the term retained.
  • Editorial inference: the same architecture could plausibly be extended to broadband by using a multi-pinhole mask, but the reference's chromatic dispersion would then set a new bandwidth limit; the paper lists such an extension as future work.
  • Editorial inference: the roughly 2 nm RMS differential-aberration stability threshold suggests that, even with single-shot speed, the practical contrast floor will be set by non-common-path stability between the two split channels, which could be verified by injecting time-varying differential aberrations in the simulation.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a new focal-plane wavefront sensing variant, the Spatially-Clipped Self-Coherent Camera (SCSCC), which uses a pinhole placed closer to the Lyot stop than in the classical SCC and a knife-edge beamsplitter to record fringed and unfringed images in a single exposure. The authors derive a linear measurement model relating the difference image to the real and imaginary parts of the speckle field, construct an interaction matrix from Fourier DM modes, and use EFC to dig a 5-20 lambda/D dark hole in a monochromatic HCIPy simulation. They report a normalized intensity of ~4e-10 and a ~50x deeper contrast than pairwise probing (PWP) for temporally evolving speckles. They also present a sensitivity comparison to the classical SCC and a study of differential aberrations, concluding that the SCSCC is a promising sensor for HWO.

Significance. If the reported performance is robust, the SCSCC would be a meaningful step toward single-shot focal-plane wavefront sensing at the contrast levels needed for HWO. The use of an open-source simulation tool and the inclusion of sensitivity and differential-aberration tests are strengths. However, the quantitative claims rest on two assumptions that need scrutiny: the validity of dropping the |E2|^2 term in the measurement equation, and the use of a separable spatiotemporal PSD with identical temporal behavior at all spatial frequencies. The simulation is self-consistent rather than experimentally validated, so the claims should be presented as first-order simulation results pending laboratory confirmation.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2, Eq. (4)] Eq. (4) is obtained from Eq. (3) by dropping |E2|^2 under the assumption E2 << E1. This assumption is not satisfied in the dark-hole regime: Section 4 states the SCSCC moves the pinhole closer to the Lyot stop to increase reference flux, and after EFC the speckle intensity is ~4e-10, so E1 amplitude is ~2e-5. The three-PSF interaction-matrix construction described at the beginning of Section 3 would remove the |E2|^2 pedestal, but the manuscript never states that this calibrated subtraction is applied to the single-shot closed-loop measurement. If Eq. (4) is used literally, the reconstruction is dominated by the reference pedestal. Please provide the exact closed-loop measurement equation and specify how the |E2|^2 term is removed in practice.
  2. [§3, Eq. (11)] The spatiotemporal PSD is assumed separable, with the same temporal behavior at all spatial frequencies. The paper acknowledges this assumption, but the headline ~50x advantage over PWP depends on it: if high-order speckles decorrelate faster than low-order ones (as in Refs. 19-21), the single-shot sensor's advantage will be reduced. Please add a sensitivity study with a frequency-dependent temporal PSD, or at least a quantitative bound on the effect, before claiming a general speed advantage.
  3. [§3-§4] The sensing-and-control simulation uses the same HCIPy forward model both to build the interaction matrix and to generate closed-loop measurements, so the reported 4e-10 contrast and 50x comparison are self-consistent simulation results rather than independent validations. Please state this explicitly and specify how integration time, photon noise, probe amplitude, and duty cycle were matched between PWP and SCSCC; otherwise the quantitative ratio may be sensitive to implementation choices.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§2, Eq. (5)] In Eq. (5), the second row of the matrix uses Re{E_Mn} twice; the second entry should likely be Im{E_Mn}.
  2. [§4, Fig. 7 and Conclusion] The text introduces 'identical static amplitude aberrations' in the unfringed channel, but the conclusion states the loop diverges for 'differential phase aberrations' above 2 nm RMS. Please clarify whether the injected aberrations are amplitude or phase, or both.
  3. [§4, Fig. 5] The text says 'the mean NI for the PWP+EFC method decreases for shorter lifetimes,' which appears backwards: shorter speckle lifetimes should make the final NI worse (increase). Please reword or correct.
  4. [§5, Conclusion] Typo: 'utlizing' should be 'utilizing'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the SCSCC performance claims are simulation-derived and not forced by definition or by self-citation.

full rationale

Walked the derivation chain. Equation (3) to Equation (4) drops the |E2|^2 term under an assumption (E2 << E1) that is not well justified and may be inconsistent with the dark-hole regime, but the paper's interaction-matrix calibration using three PSF differences (SCC stop, Lyot stop with pinhole blocked, pinhole alone) would remove |E2|^2, so the closed-loop result is not an algebraic consequence of the dropped term. The SCSCC-vs-PWP comparison is a simulation that uses the same HCIPy forward model for both sensing strategies; this is self-consistent but not circular, as neither sensor's output is defined as the other's input. The self-citations (Refs. 14, 16, 19) provide methodology and context, but the central performance claims (4e-10 dark-hole contrast, roughly 50x improvement over PWP) are supported by the described simulations, not by those citations alone. No prediction reduces by construction to a fitted input or to a self-citation chain. The main caveat is an unstated calibration detail for the |E2|^2 term, which is a missing proof/internal gap rather than circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The performance claims rest on a set of modeling choices in the HCIPy simulation: a linear coronagraph model, a separable PSD with equal temporal behavior across spatial frequencies, a coherent reference field, and an idealized co-phasing of the two channels. None of these is independently verified outside the simulation.

free parameters (7)
  • Spatial PSD parameters (beta, u0, S0) = beta=2, u0=1; S0 set implicitly to yield 0.075 lambda PV
    Chosen to mimic space-like aberrations; controls the spatial distribution of speckles in the simulation.
  • Temporal PSD index alpha = 4
    Hand-chosen temporal roll-off; controls the speckle decorrelation rate and directly influences the SCSCC-vs-PWP speed comparison.
  • Temporal PSD constant k0 = varied to set speckle lifetime (x-axis of Fig. 5)
    Sets the correlation time; the x-axis sweep is the parameter scan that produces the 50x contrast claim.
  • Pinhole radial position and diameter = 0.545 DEP, 0.02 DEP
    Design choices; closer pinhole is what enables the bandwidth and sensitivity gains claimed over the classical SCC.
  • DM probe amplitude = 0.01 lambda (750 nm)
    Used for interaction matrix calibration and PWP probes; a tuned parameter affecting reconstruction accuracy.
  • Regularization and loop gains = 2e-3 (interaction matrix), 0.03/0.08 (sensitivity), 0.25 (loop gain)
    Tikhonov and loop gain values are hand-chosen; the paper notes calibration tuning affects results (2x vs 5x sensitivity gain).
  • Injected static aberration amplitude and power law = ~10 nm RMS, power law -2.5
    Used only in the sensitivity comparison; chosen to evaluate reconstruction accuracy.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The coronagraph and optical train are linear and accurately modeled by HCIPy's scalar vortex coronagraph implementation.
    Invoked throughout Section 3 for the simulated measurements and for the interaction matrix calibration.
  • ad hoc to paper The spatiotemporal PSD is separable and every spatial frequency follows the same temporal behavior.
    Explicitly stated in Section 3: 'we assume the same temporal behavior for all spatial frequencies to reduce our explored parameter space.' This is load-bearing for the speed comparison.
  • domain assumption The reference field E2 remains coherent with the speckle field E1 over the exposure time.
    Basis of all self-coherent camera sensing; assumed in Eq. 1.
  • ad hoc to paper The reference field is much weaker than the speckle field (E2 << E1), so |E2|^2 can be dropped in Eq. 4.
    Stated in Section 2; questionable in a deep dark hole where E1 is suppressed to ~1e-5 amplitude.
  • domain assumption The fringed and unfringed channels are matched except for the explicitly injected differential aberrations.
    The differential aberration study in Section 4 assumes all non-common-path errors other than the injected ones are zero.
  • standard math Fourier modes on the DM form a complete basis for the correctable wavefront errors.
    Used in Eqs. 5-9 and in the calibration; standard practice in focal-plane wavefront control.
invented entities (1)
  • Spatially-Clipped Self-Coherent Camera (SCSCC) layout
    purpose: Single-shot focal plane wavefront sensing using a knife-edge beamsplitter to form fringed and unfringed channels with a pinhole at 0.545 DEP.
    New instrument concept proposed in this paper; evidence is monochromatic simulation only, no hardware or on-sky data. The 2 nm RMS differential aberration tolerance is not yet demonstrated experimentally.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Single-shot focal plane wavefront sensing with the spatially-clipped self-coherent camera." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YGAIN3VR

@misc{pith2026250903870,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Single-shot focal plane wavefront sensing with the spatially-clipped self-coherent camera},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YGAIN3VR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.03870}
}
read the original abstract

The Habitable Worlds Observatory requires active speckle suppression to directly image Earth-like exoplanets. Focal plane wavefront sensing and control allows us to detect, and subsequently remove, time-varying speckles through measurements of the electric field. Two measurement-based wavefront sensing approaches are pairwise probing (PWP) and the self-coherent camera (SCC). However, the PWP technique is time-consuming, requiring at least 4 images and reducing the speed at which aberrations can be eliminated. In the SCC, a coronagraph mask diffracts light outside of the Lyot stop, where it is filtered with a pinhole. The filtered light creates a reference beam, interfering with speckles that leak through the coronagraph. The classic implementation of the SCC only works over small spectral bandwidths and needs significantly oversized optics which limits its implementation. We propose a new variant, the Spatially-Clipped Self-Coherent Camera (SCSCC). The SCSCC utilizes a pinhole placed closer to the Lyot Stop, reducing the overall beam footprint and boosting the sensor resolution. A knife-edge beam splitter downstream of the Lyot Stop splits the light into two channels: fringed and unfringed. This allows us to sense the wavefront with a single exposure. Time-varying aberrations are effectively frozen in place, making them easy to remove. We present monochromatic simulation results of the SCSCC in a sensing and control loop, demonstrating a normalized intensity of ~ 4 * 10^-10 in a 5-20 lambda/D dark hole. We find that wavefront control paired with the SCSCC achieves ~ 50x deeper contrast than that achieved with PWP in a temporally evolving speckle field. Our results make the SCSCC a valuable wavefront sensor concept for the upcoming Habitable World Observatory mission.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.03870 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. An overview of the spatially-clipped SCC architecture. On-axis light focuses onto a coronagraph mask. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The Lyot stop for the spatially clipped SCC. The pinhole is located at a radial distance of 54 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Phase screens depicting spatial and temporally varying surface aberrations across a pupil at time steps of 0 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: A simulated 5-20λ/D dark hole produced with the SCSCC + EFC. The colorbar denotes normalized intensity in log scale. 4. ANALYSIS We compared the SCSCC wavefront sensing performance to that of the PWP sensing strategy. In constructing our Jacobian from PWP measurements,…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: A comparison of the SCC+EFC to PWP+EFC wavefront sensing and control methods as a function of speckle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Reconstructed wavefront RMS as a function of photon flux. The blue circles represent the SCSCC wavefront [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Final NI as a function of differential amplitude aberrations for the SCSCC. The control loop begins diverging [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

28 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The luvoir extreme coronagraph for living planetary systems (eclips) i: searching and characterizing exoplanetary gems,

    Pueyo, L., Stark, C., Juanola-Parramon, R., Zimmerman, N., Bolcar, M., Roberge, A., Arney, G., Ruane, G., Riggs, A. J. E., Belikov, R., Sirbu, D., Redding, D., Soummer, R., Laginja, I., and Will, S., “The luvoir extreme coronagraph for living planetary systems (eclips) i: searching and characterizing exoplanetary gems,” 3 (09 2019)

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    High-Contrast Coronagraphy,

    Kenworthy, M. A. and Haffert, S. Y., “High-Contrast Coronagraphy,” (May 2025). Publisher: Annual Reviews

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    Direct Imaging and Spectroscopy of Extrasolar Planets,

    Currie, T., Biller, B., Lagrange, A., Marois, C., Guyon, O., Nielsen, E. L., Bonnefoy, M., and De Rosa, R. J., “Direct Imaging and Spectroscopy of Extrasolar Planets,” in [ Protostars and Planets VII ], Inutsuka, S., Aikawa, Y., Muto, T., Tomida, K., and Tamura, M., eds.,Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference Series 534, 799 (July 2023)

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Enabling the Habitable Worlds Observatory: using systems engineering, integrated modeling and technology development to achieve ultra-stable optical systems,

    Coyle, L. E., “Enabling the Habitable Worlds Observatory: using systems engineering, integrated modeling and technology development to achieve ultra-stable optical systems,” in [ Astronomical Optics: Design, Manufacture, and Test of Space and Ground Systems IV ], Hull, T. B., Kim, D., and Hallibert, P., eds., PC12677, PC1267702, SPIE (2023). Backup Publis...

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Pair-wise, deformable mirror, image plane-based diversity electric field estimation for high contrast coronagraphy,

    Give’on, A., Kern, B. D., and Shaklan, S., “Pair-wise, deformable mirror, image plane-based diversity electric field estimation for high contrast coronagraphy,” in [ Techniques and Instrumentation for Detection of Exoplanets V ], 8151, 376–385, SPIE (Sept. 2011)

    work page 2011

  6. [6]

    Methods and limitations of focal plane sensing, estimation, and control in high-contrast imaging,

    Groff, T. D., Riggs, A. J. E., Kern, B., and Kasdin, N. J., “Methods and limitations of focal plane sensing, estimation, and control in high-contrast imaging,” Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems 2, 011009 (Dec. 2015). Publisher: SPIE

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    High-order wavefront sensing and control for the Ro- man Coronagraph Instrument (CGI): architecture and measured performance,

    Cady, E., Bowman, N., Greenbaum, A., Ingalls, J., Kern, B., Krist, J., Marx, D., Poberezhskiy, I., Riggs, A., Ruane, G., Seo, B.-J., Shi, F., and Zhou, H., “High-order wavefront sensing and control for the Ro- man Coronagraph Instrument (CGI): architecture and measured performance,” Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems 11 (Apr. 2025)

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    Comparative laboratory study of electric field conjugation algorithms

    Desai, N., Potier, A., Redmond, S. F., Ruane, G., Poon, P. K., Riggs, A. J. E., Noyes, M., and Prada, C. M., “Comparative laboratory study of electric field conjugation algorithms,” Journal of Astronomical Telescopes, Instruments, and Systems 10 (July 2024). arXiv:2309.04920 [astro-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

Show all 28 references
  1. [9]

    The Self-Coherent Camera: a new tool for planet detection,

    Baudoz, P., Boccaletti, A., Baudrand, J., and Rouan, D., “The Self-Coherent Camera: a new tool for planet detection,” in [IAU Colloq. 200: Direct Imaging of Exoplanets: Science & Techniques ], Aime, C. and Vakili, F., eds., 553–558 (Jan. 2006)

    2006

  2. [10]

    Hardware demonstra- tions of component-level technologies for ultra-stable optical systems,

    Coyle, L., Knight, J. S., Hicks, B., Frater, E., Ho, J., Shugrue, J., and Jurczyk, S., “Hardware demonstra- tions of component-level technologies for ultra-stable optical systems,” in [2021 IEEE Aerospace Conference (50100) ], 1–11 (Mar. 2021). ISSN: 1095-323X

    2021

  3. [11]

    Minimization of non-common path aberrations at the palomar telescope using a self-coherent camera,

    Galicher, R., Baudoz, P., Delorme, J.-R., Mawet, D., Bottom, M., Wallace, J. K., Serabyn, E., and Shelton, C., “Minimization of non-common path aberrations at the palomar telescope using a self-coherent camera,” 631, A143. Publisher: EDP Sciences

  4. [12]

    Fast-modulation imaging with the self-coherent camera,

    Martinez, P., “Fast-modulation imaging with the self-coherent camera,” Astronomy & Astrophysics 629, L10 (Sept. 2019). Publisher: EDP Sciences

    2019

  5. [13]

    The polarization-encoded self-coherent camera,

    Bos, S. P., “The polarization-encoded self-coherent camera,” Astronomy & Astrophysics 646, A177 (Feb. 2021). Publisher: EDP Sciences

    2021

  6. [14]

    The spectrally modulated self-coherent camera (SM-SCC): Increasing throughput for focal- plane wavefront sensing,

    Haffert, S. Y., “The spectrally modulated self-coherent camera (SM-SCC): Increasing throughput for focal- plane wavefront sensing,” Astronomy & Astrophysics 659, A51 (Mar. 2022). Publisher: EDP Sciences

    2022

  7. [15]

    Performance of the Fast Atmospheric Self Coherent camera at the NEW-EARTH lab and a simplified measurement algorithm,

    Thompson, W., Marois, C., Singh, G., Lardi` ere, O., Gerard, B., Fu, Q., and Heidrich, W., “Performance of the Fast Atmospheric Self Coherent camera at the NEW-EARTH lab and a simplified measurement algorithm,” in [ Adaptive Optics Systems VIII ], 12185, 724–735, SPIE (Aug. 2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    Implicit electric field Conjugation: Data-driven focal plane control,

    Haffert, S. Y., Males, J. R., Ahn, K., Van Gorkom, K., Guyon, O., Close, L. M., Long, J. D., Hedglen, A. D., Schatz, L., Kautz, M., Lumbres, J., Rodack, A., Knight, J. M., and Miller, K., “Implicit electric field Conjugation: Data-driven focal plane control,” (Mar. 2023). arXi...

    2023 arXiv

  9. [17]

    High Contrast Imaging for Python (HCIPy): an open-source adaptive optics and coronagraph simulator,

    Por, E. H., Haffert, S. Y., Radhakrishnan, V. M., Doelman, D. S., van Kooten, M., and Bos, S. P., “High Contrast Imaging for Python (HCIPy): an open-source adaptive optics and coronagraph simulator,” in [Adaptive Optics Systems VI ], Close, L. M., Schreiber, L., and Schmidt, D...

    2018

  10. [18]

    Scalar vortex coronagraph mask design and predicted performance,

    Ruane, G., Mawet, D., Riggs, A. J. E., and Serabyn, E., “Scalar vortex coronagraph mask design and predicted performance,” in [ Techniques and Instrumentation for Detection of Exoplanets IX ], 61 (Sept. 2019). arXiv:1908.09786 [astro-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  11. [19]

    The mysterious lives of speckles. i. residual atmospheric speckle lifetimes in ground-based coronagraphs,

    Males, J. R., Fitzgerald, M. P., Belikov, R., and Guyon, O., “The mysterious lives of speckles. i. residual atmospheric speckle lifetimes in ground-based coronagraphs,” 133(1028), 104504

  12. [20]

    Optimal fourier control performance and speckle behavior in high- contrast imaging with adaptive optics,

    Poyneer, L. A. and Macintosh, B. A., “Optimal fourier control performance and speckle behavior in high- contrast imaging with adaptive optics,” 14(17), 7499–7514

  13. [21]

    Speckle lifetimes in high-contrast adaptive optics,

    Macintosh, B., Poyneer, L., Sivaramakrishnan, A., and Marois, C., “Speckle lifetimes in high-contrast adaptive optics,” 5903, 170–177. ADS Bibcode: 2005SPIE.5903..170M

  14. [22]

    Outer scale of turbulence appropriate to modeling refractive-index structure profiles,

    Coulman, C. E., Vernin, J., Coqueugniot, Y., and Caccia, J. L., “Outer scale of turbulence appropriate to modeling refractive-index structure profiles,” Applied Optics 27, 155–160 (Jan. 1988). Publisher: Optica Publishing Group

    1988

  15. [23]

    On representing and correcting wavefront errors in high-contrast imaging systems,

    Give’on, A., Kasdin, N. J., Vanderbei, R. J., and Avitzour, Y., “On representing and correcting wavefront errors in high-contrast imaging systems,” 23(5), 1063–1073

  16. [24]

    Experimental demonstration of a three-sided pyramid wavefront sensor on the CACTI testbed,

    Schatz, L. H., Codona, J., Long, J. D., Males, J. R., Pullen, W., Gorkom, K. V., Chambouleyron, V., Close, L. M., Correia, C., Fauvarque, O., Fusco, T., Guyon, O., Hart, M., Janin-Potiron, P., Johnson, R., Jovanovic, N., Lumbres, J. R., Mateen, M., Sauvage, J.-F., and Neichel,...

    2022

  17. [25]

    qCMOS detectors and the case of hypothetical primordial black holes in the solar system, near earth objects, transients, and other high-cadence observations,

    Roth, M. M., “qCMOS detectors and the case of hypothetical primordial black holes in the solar system, near earth objects, transients, and other high-cadence observations,” 8(11), 282 (2024). Publisher: The American Astronomical Society

    2024

  18. [26]

    Astropy: A community Python package for astronomy,

    Astropy Collaboration, Robitaille, T. P., Tollerud, E. J., Greenfield, P., Droettboom, M., Bray, E., Aldcroft, T., Davis, M., Ginsburg, A., Price-Whelan, A. M., Kerzendorf, W. E., Conley, A., Crighton, N., Barbary, K., Muna, D., Ferguson, H., Grollier, F., Parikh, M. M., Nair,...

    2013

  19. [27]

    Matplotlib: A 2d graphics environment,

    Hunter, J. D., “Matplotlib: A 2d graphics environment,” Computing in Science & Engineering 9(3), 90–95 (2007)

    2007

  20. [28]

    Ipython: A system for interactive scientific computing,

    Perez, F. and Granger, B. E., “Ipython: A system for interactive scientific computing,” Computing in Science and Engineering 9(3), 21–29 (2007)

    2007

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.