Abstract
The number of probe particles that is detected on a single pixel of a micrograph is finite, either due to source (low power), detector (low dynamic range) or specimen damage constraints. The sensitivity of an otherwise perfect microscope is then limited by the statistical fluctuations in the number of detected particles. It is thus crucial to strive for the optimal signal-to-noise ratio per detected photon. Here we analytically and numerically compare three different contrast enhancing techniques that are all based on self-imaging cavities: CW cavity enhanced microscopy, cavity ring-down microscopy and multi-pass microscopy. We show that all three schemes can lead to sensitivities beyond those achievable with a single pass.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 015007 |
| Number of pages | 16 |
| Journal | JPhys Photonics |
| Volume | 1 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Early online date | 6 Dec 2018 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 6 Dec 2018 |
Austrian Fields of Science 2012
- 103021 Optics
Keywords
- multi-pass imaging
- cavity-enhanced microscopy
- contrast enhancement
- optical imaging
- Contrast enhancement
- Optical imaging
- Cavity-enhanced microscopy
- Multi-pass imaging
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Full-field cavity enhanced microscopy techniques'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver