Comparing focal plane wavefront control techniques:\\Numerical simulations and laboratory experiments
AI-generated Key Points
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.
- Spectroscopic observations are crucial for understanding exoplanet physical properties
- Less than 1% of detected exoplanets have been characterized through spectroscopy
- High-contrast imaging techniques offer an alternative by separating light from off-axis sources, providing access to atmospheric signatures
- Future space facilities like WFIRST/LUVOIR/HabEX will use coronagraphic instruments for imaging and spectroscopy
- Precise control of wavefront phase and amplitude errors is a major technological challenge in instrument design
- Various focal plane wavefront sensing (FPWS) and control techniques have been proposed and demonstrated in labs
- A recent study compared pair-wise (PW) with electric field conjugation (EFC) and self-coherent camera (SCC) techniques in visible light using simulations and experiments
- Both PW+EFC and SCC were able to minimize speckle intensity in coronagraphic images effectively
- Both techniques reached laboratory bench limitations, achieving contrast levels as low as 5e-9 in a narrow spectral band (<0.25% bandwidth)
Authors: Axel Potier, Pierre Baudoz, Raphaël Galicher, Garima Singh, Anthony Boccaletti
Abstract: Fewer than 1% of all exoplanets detected to date have been characterized on the basis of spectroscopic observations of their atmosphere. Unlike indirect methods, high-contrast imaging offers access to atmospheric signatures by separating the light of a faint off-axis source from that of its parent star. Forthcoming space facilities, such as WFIRST/LUVOIR/HabEX, are expected to use coronagraphic instruments capable of imaging and spectroscopy in order to understand the physical properties of remote worlds. The primary technological challenge that drives the design of these instruments involves the precision control of wavefront phase and amplitude errors. Several FPWS and control techniques have been proposed and demonstrated in laboratory to achieve the required accuracy. However, these techniques have never been tested and compared under the same laboratory conditions. This paper compares two of these techniques in a closed loop in visible light: the pair-wise (PW) associated with electric field conjugation (EFC) and self-coherent camera (SCC). We first ran numerical simulations to optimize PW wavefront sensing and to predict the performance of a coronagraphic instrument with PW associated to EFC wavefront control, assuming modeling errors for both PW and EFC. Then we implemented the techniques on a laboratory testbed. We introduced known aberrations into the system and compared the wavefront sensing using both PW and SCC. The speckle intensity in the coronagraphic image was then minimized using PW+EFC and SCC independently. We demonstrate that both SCC and PW+EFC can generate a dark hole in space-like conditions in a few iterations. Both techniques reach the current limitation of our laboratory bench and provide coronagraphic contrast levels of 5e-9 in a narrow spectral band (<0.25% bandwidth)
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Score: 0
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.