• Acta Optica Sinica
  • Vol. 43, Issue 6, 0612006 (2023)
Mengxue Yang1、2, Zhulian Li1、3, Rongwang Li1、3, and Yuqiang Li1、3、*
Author Affiliations
  • 1Yunnan Observatories, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Kunming 650216, Yunnan, China
  • 2University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
  • 3Key Laboratory of Space Object & Debris Observation, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing 210034, Jiangsu, China
  • show less
    DOI: 10.3788/AOS221114 Cite this Article Set citation alerts
    Mengxue Yang, Zhulian Li, Rongwang Li, Yuqiang Li. Sharpness Evaluation Algorithm Based on Real-Time Automatic Focusing of 1.2 m Telescope System[J]. Acta Optica Sinica, 2023, 43(6): 0612006 Copy Citation Text show less
    Definition of FWHM
    Fig. 1. Definition of FWHM
    HFD of different type of images. (a) Noise image; (b) faint star; (c) star in focus
    Fig. 2. HFD of different type of images. (a) Noise image; (b) faint star; (c) star in focus
    Algorithm flow chart
    Fig. 3. Algorithm flow chart
    Comparison of images before and after anisotropic diffusion method processing. (a) Original image; (b) image after processing
    Fig. 4. Comparison of images before and after anisotropic diffusion method processing. (a) Original image; (b) image after processing
    Comparison of images before and after Qtsu algorithm processing. (a) Original image; (b) image after processing
    Fig. 5. Comparison of images before and after Qtsu algorithm processing. (a) Original image; (b) image after processing
    Comparison of images before and after cluster algorithm processing. (a) Original image; (b) image after processing
    Fig. 6. Comparison of images before and after cluster algorithm processing. (a) Original image; (b) image after processing
    Performance comparison of algorithms. (a) Performance comparison of algorithms under different noise when FWHM is constant; (b) performance comparison of algorithms under different spot sizes when SNR is constant
    Fig. 7. Performance comparison of algorithms. (a) Performance comparison of algorithms under different noise when FWHM is constant; (b) performance comparison of algorithms under different spot sizes when SNR is constant
    Partial image sequences of object 33320
    Fig. 8. Partial image sequences of object 33320
    Outlier detection
    Fig. 9. Outlier detection
    FWHM values obtained by fitting for different frames of image numbered 33320 (arrow points to direction of increase of i)
    Fig. 10. FWHM values obtained by fitting for different frames of image numbered 33320 (arrow points to direction of increase of i)
    Focusing curve fitted with measured FWHM
    Fig. 11. Focusing curve fitted with measured FWHM
    HFD of different image frames in target numbered 33320
    Fig. 12. HFD of different image frames in target numbered 33320
    V-shaped focusing curves after fitting
    Fig. 13. V-shaped focusing curves after fitting
    MethodFWHMHFDHFD-ICAIRAF
    Focusing ratio /%90949898
    Table 1. Comparison of precise focusing ratios

    Noise

    percentage /%

    01234510
    FWHM90908888868684
    HFD94949292909088
    HFD-ICA98989898989896
    IRAF98989898969494
    Table 2. Comparison of precise focusing ratio with noise disturbance
    ParameterMin timeMax timeMean time
    FWHM22.438.932.4
    HFD11.616.714.3
    HFD-ICA3.65.84.7
    IRAF32.448.645.7
    Table 3. Comparison of computing time of four algorithms unit: s
    Mengxue Yang, Zhulian Li, Rongwang Li, Yuqiang Li. Sharpness Evaluation Algorithm Based on Real-Time Automatic Focusing of 1.2 m Telescope System[J]. Acta Optica Sinica, 2023, 43(6): 0612006
    Download Citation