Rethinking the modeling of the instrumental response of telescopes with a differentiable optical model

We propose a paradigm shift in the data-driven modeling of the instrumental response field of telescopes. By adding a differentiable optical forward model into the modeling framework, we change the data-driven modeling space from the pixels to the wavefront. This allows to transfer a great deal of complexity from the instrumental response into the forward model while being able to adapt to the observations, remaining data-driven. Our framework allows a way forward to building powerful models that are physically motivated, interpretable, and that do not require special calibration data. We show that for a simplified setting of a space telescope, this framework represents a real performance breakthrough compared to existing data-driven approaches with reconstruction errors decreasing 5 fold at observation resolution and more than 10 fold for a 3x super-resolution. We successfully model chromatic variations of the instrument’s response only using noisy broad-band in-focus observations.

[1]  J. Goodman Introduction to Fourier optics , 1969 .

[2]  A. J. Pickles A Stellar Spectral Flux Library , .

[3]  John E. Krist,et al.  Tiny Tim : an HST PSF Simulator , 1993 .

[4]  Jean-Luc Starck,et al.  Multi-CCD modelling of the point spread function , 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics.

[5]  H. Hoekstra,et al.  Bayesian galaxy shape measurement for weak lensing surveys – III. Application to the Canada–France–Hawaii Telescope Lensing Survey , 2012, 1210.8201.

[6]  O. Lahav,et al.  Dark Energy Survey year 3 results: point spread function modelling , 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

[7]  Liyuan Liu,et al.  On the Variance of the Adaptive Learning Rate and Beyond , 2019, ICLR.

[8]  P. Cochat,et al.  Et al , 2008, Archives de pediatrie : organe officiel de la Societe francaise de pediatrie.

[9]  É. Bertin Automated Morphometry with SExtractor and PSFEx , 2011 .

[10]  Luciana Bonino,et al.  Status of the performance of the Euclid spacecraft , 2020, Astronomical Telescopes + Instrumentation.

[11]  James R Fienup,et al.  Applications of algorithmic differentiation to phase retrieval algorithms. , 2014, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[12]  John E. Krist,et al.  20 years of Hubble Space Telescope optical modeling using Tiny Tim , 2011 .

[13]  R. Noll Zernike polynomials and atmospheric turbulence , 1976 .

[14]  Alison P. Wong,et al.  Phase retrieval and design with automatic differentiation: tutorial , 2021, Journal of the Optical Society of America B.

[15]  A. Pickles A Stellar Spectral Flux Library: 1150–25000 Å , 1998 .

[16]  George Barbastathis,et al.  Phase imaging with an untrained neural network , 2020, Light: Science & Applications.

[17]  Martin Kilbinger,et al.  Cosmology with cosmic shear observations: a review , 2014, Reports on progress in physics. Physical Society.

[18]  Dongmei Cai,et al.  Point Spread Function Modelling for Wide Field Small Aperture Telescopes with a Denoising Autoencoder , 2020, ArXiv.

[19]  J. Starck,et al.  Euclid: Nonparametric point spread function field recovery through interpolation on a graph Laplacian , 2019, Astronomy & Astrophysics.

[20]  Yonina C. Eldar,et al.  Phase Retrieval with Application to Optical Imaging: A contemporary overview , 2015, IEEE Signal Processing Magazine.

[21]  M. Schmid Principles Of Optics Electromagnetic Theory Of Propagation Interference And Diffraction Of Light , 2016 .