Fringe 2005 pp 118-125 | Cite as

Dynamic evaluation of fringe parameters by recurrence processing algorithms

  • Igor Gurov
  • Alexey Zakharov

Discussion and conclusions

Recurrence fringe processing methods are based on difference equations formalism, and a priori knowledge about fringes should be included in Eq. (16) before calculations. It means that recurrence parametric methods are more specialized providing advantages in accuracy, noise-immunity and processing speed. At first sight, requirement to accurate a priori knowledge seems like restriction. However, almost the same information is needed after calculation in conventional methods to interpret processing results. Parametric approach allows one to use a priori knowledge in well-defined form including non-stationary and nonlinear fringe transformations. Thus, parametric approach presents flexible tool for dynamic fringe analysis and processing. The advantages of the recurrence algorithms considered consist in high noise-immunity and signal processing speed.

Keywords

Optical Coherence Tomography Recurrence Algorithm Fringe Signal Fringe Frequency Tilted Wavefront 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Takeda, M, Ina, H, Kobayashi, S (1982) Fourier transform method of fringe-pattern analysis for computer-based topography and interferometry. J Opt. Soc. Am. 72: 156–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grevenkamp, JE, Bruning, JH (1992) Phase-shifting interferometry, in Optical Shop Testing, D Malacara, ed. Wiley New York.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gurov, I, Ermolaeva, E, Zakharov, A (2004) Analysis of low-coherence interference fringes by the Kalman filtering method. J Opt. Soc. Amer. A 21: 242–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alarousu, E, Gurov, I, Hast, J, Myllylä, R, Zakharov, A (2003) Optical coherence tomography of multilayer tissue based on the dynamical stochastic fringe processing. Proc. SPIE 5149: 13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alarousu, E, Gurov, I, Hast, J, Myllylä, R, Prykäri, T, Zakharov, A (2003) Optical coherence tomography evaluation of internal random structure of wood fiber tissue. Proc. SPIE 5132: 149–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zakharov, A, Volkov, M, Gurov, I, Temnov, V, Sokolovski-Tinten, K, von der Linde, D (2002) Interferometric diagnostics of ablation craters created by the femtosecond laser pulses. J Opt. Technol.: 69: 478–482.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gurov, I, Zakharov, A, Voronina, E (2004) Evaluation of interference fringe parameters by recurrence dynamic data processing. Proc. ODIMAP IV: 60–71.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bellini, M, Fontana, R, Gurov, I, Karpets, A, Materazzi, M, Taratin, M, Zakharov, A (2005) Dymamic signal processing and analysis in the OCT system for evaluating multilayer tissues. Will be published in Proc. SPIE.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gurov, I, Zakharov, A, Bilyk, V, Larionov, A (2004) Low-coherence fringe evaluation by synchronous demodulation and Kalman filtering method: a comparison. Proc. OSAV’2004: 218–224.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Igor Gurov
    • 1
  • Alexey Zakharov
    • 1
  1. 1.Information Technologies, Mechanics and OpticsSaint Petersburg State UniversitySaint PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations