Microscopy: Deconvolve the PSF and enhance resolution

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter eoghan
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Microscopy Resolution
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the limitations of resolution in diffracted limited microscopy, specifically regarding the Rayleigh criterion and the deconvolution of the point spread function (PSF). Participants highlight that while deconvolution can enhance resolution by mitigating diffraction effects, it is an ill-posed problem that may lead to non-unique solutions and susceptibility to noise. The reference to Frank's book emphasizes the challenges of applying optical definitions of resolution in high-resolution electron microscopy, particularly at the nanometer scale.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of diffraction limits in microscopy
  • Familiarity with the Rayleigh criterion
  • Knowledge of deconvolution techniques in image processing
  • Basic principles of electron microscopy
NEXT STEPS
  • Research advanced deconvolution algorithms for microscopy
  • Study the mathematical foundations of ill-posed problems
  • Explore the implications of noise in image processing
  • Investigate the limitations of optical resolution in electron microscopy
USEFUL FOR

Microscopists, image processing specialists, and researchers in materials science seeking to enhance imaging techniques and understand the complexities of resolution in microscopy.

eoghan
Messages
201
Reaction score
7
Hi all,

In a diffracted limited microscope the resolution has a limit given by the Airy disk and this gives rise to the Rayleigh criteria. But if I deconvolve the observed image removing the psf then I eliminate the diffraction effects and I can resolve any distinct points, whatever close they are. Am I missing something?
 
Science news on Phys.org
Also, another question related to the previous one. In the book Three-dimensional electron microscopy of macromolecular assemblies by Frank, ed 2006 ch 2.5.1 - "Concept of resolution" it is said

"Optical definitions of resolution are based on the ability of an instrument to resolve two points separated by a given distance d. [...] [Another] criticism is that the resolution criterion formulated above does not lend itself to a suitable experiment when applied to high-resolution EM. On the nanometer scale, any test object as well as the support it must be placed on, reveals its atomic makeup."

What does this passage mean? Why cannot have suitable experiments with the Rayleigh resolution criterion?
 
eoghan said:
In a diffracted limited microscope the resolution has a limit given by the Airy disk and this gives rise to the Rayleigh criteria. But if I deconvolve the observed image removing the psf then I eliminate the diffraction effects and I can resolve any distinct points, whatever close they are. Am I missing something?
The problem is that the deconvolution problem is ill-posed, meaning that a solution may not be unique, or may not even exist, and/or is quickly corrupted by the presence of noise, no matter how tiny.
 
olivermsun said:
The problem is that the deconvolution problem is ill-posed, meaning that a solution may not be unique, or may not even exist, and/or is quickly corrupted by the presence of noise, no matter how tiny.
Nevertheless deconvolution is nowadays a standard technique to enhance resolution, though, for the reasons mentioned by you, it has it's own limitations.
 
Sure, approximate deconvolution methods are used all the time to improve images. But the mathematics tell us why we can't just eliminate diffraction or aberrations once and for all and be done with it. ;)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
5K