OSA's Digital Library

Journal of the Optical Society of America A

Journal of the Optical Society of America A

| OPTICS, IMAGE SCIENCE, AND VISION

  • Editor: Franco Gori
  • Vol. 27, Iss. 6 — Jun. 1, 2010
  • pp: 1311–1321

Two matrix approaches for aerial image formation obtained by extending and modifying the transmission cross coefficients

Kenji Yamazoe  »View Author Affiliations


JOSA A, Vol. 27, Issue 6, pp. 1311-1321 (2010)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.27.001311


View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (589 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

This paper physically compares two different matrix representations of partially coherent imaging with the introduction of matrices E and Z, containing the source, object, and pupil. The matrix E is obtained by extending the Hopkins transmission cross coefficient (TCC) approach such that the pupil function is shifted while the matrix Z is obtained by shifting the object spectrum. The aerial image I can be written as a convex quadratic form I = ϕ | E | ϕ = ϕ | Z | ϕ , where | ϕ is a column vector representing plane waves. It is shown that rank ( Z ) rank ( E ) = rank ( T ) = N , where T is the TCC matrix and N is the number of the point sources for a given unpolarized illumination. Therefore, the matrix Z requires fewer than N eigenfunctions for a complete aerial image formation, while the matrix E or T always requires N eigenfunctions. More importantly, rank ( Z ) varies depending on the degree of coherence determined by the von Neumann entropy, which is shown to relate to the mutual intensity. For an ideal pinhole as an object, emitting spatially coherent light, only one eigenfunction—i.e., the pupil function—is enough to describe the coherent imaging. In this case, we obtain rank ( Z ) = 1 and the pupil function as the only eigenfunction regardless of the illumination. However, rank ( E ) = rank ( T ) = N even when the object is an ideal pinhole. In this sense, aerial image formation with the matrix Z is physically more meaningful than with the matrix E. The matrix Z is decomposed as B B , where B is a singular matrix, suggesting that the matrix B as well as Z is a principal operator characterizing the degree of coherence of the partially coherent imaging.

© 2010 Optical Society of America

OCIS Codes
(110.2990) Imaging systems : Image formation theory
(110.4980) Imaging systems : Partial coherence in imaging
(110.5220) Imaging systems : Photolithography

ToC Category:
Imaging Systems

History
Original Manuscript: November 6, 2009
Revised Manuscript: March 12, 2010
Manuscript Accepted: April 6, 2010
Published: May 12, 2010

Citation
Kenji Yamazoe, "Two matrix approaches for aerial image formation obtained by extending and modifying the transmission cross coefficients," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 27, 1311-1321 (2010)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/josaa/abstract.cfm?URI=josaa-27-6-1311


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. F. Zernike, “The concept of degree of coherence and its application to optical problems,” Physica 5, 785–795 (1938). [CrossRef]
  2. H. H. Hopkins, “On the diffraction theory of optical image,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 217, 408–432 (1953). [CrossRef]
  3. M. Born and E. Wolf, Principles of Optics, 6th ed. (Pergamon, 1980), Chap. 10.
  4. H. Gamo, “Matrix treatment of partial coherence,” in Progress in Optics, E.Wolf, ed. (North-Holland, 1964), Vol. III, Chap. 3. [CrossRef]
  5. E. L. O’Neill, Introduction to Statistical Optics (Dover, 2003), Chap. 8.
  6. W. Goodman, Statistical Optics, 1st ed. (Wiley-Interscience, 1985), pp. 109–111.
  7. M. J. Bastiaans, “Applications of the Wigner distribution to partially coherent light beams,” in Advances in Information Optics and Photonics, A.T.Friberg and R.Dändliker, eds. (SPIE, 2008), Chap. 2. [CrossRef]
  8. W. Singer, M. Totzeck, and H. Gross, “Physical image formation,” in Handbook of Optical Systems, H.Gross, ed. (Wiley, 2005), Vol. 2, Chaps. 19 and 24.
  9. S. B. Mehta and C. J. R. Sheppard, “Phase-space representation of partially coherent imaging systems using the Cohen class distribution,” Opt. Lett. 35, 348–350 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. E. Wolf, “New spectral representation of random sources and the partially coherent fields that they generate,” Opt. Commun. 38, 3–6 (1981). [CrossRef]
  11. A. Starikov, “Effective number of degrees of freedom of partially coherent sources,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 72, 1538–1544 (1982). [CrossRef]
  12. M. J. Bastiaans, “Uncertainty principle for partially coherent light,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 73, 251–255 (1983). [CrossRef]
  13. H. M. Ozaktas, S. Yüksel, and M. A. Kutay, “Linear algebraic theory of partial coherence: discrete fields and measures of partial coherence,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 19, 1563–1571 (2002). [CrossRef]
  14. R. J. Socha and A. R. Neureuther, “Propagation effects of partially coherence in optical lithography,” J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 14, 3724–3729 (1996). [CrossRef]
  15. R. J. Socha, “Propagation effects of partially coherent light in optical lithography and inspection,” Ph.D. dissertation (University of California–Berkeley, 1997).
  16. B. E. A. Saleh and M. Rabbani, “Simulation of partially coherent imagery in the space and frequency domains and by modal expansion,” Appl. Opt. 21, 2770–2777 (1982). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. R. Miyakawa, P. Naulleau, and A. Zakhor, “Iterative procedure for in situ extreme ultraviolet optical testing with an incoherent source,” J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 27, 2927–2930 (2009). [CrossRef]
  18. Y. C. Pati and T. Kailath, “Phase-shifting masks for microlithography: automated design and mask requirements,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 11, 2438–2452 (1994). [CrossRef]
  19. N. B. Cobb, “Fast optical and process proximity correction algorithms for integrated circuit manufacturing,” Ph.D. dissertation (University of California–Berkeley, 1998).
  20. R. M. von Bünau, Y. C. Pati, Y. T. Wang, and R. F. W. Pease, “Optimal coherent decompositions for radially symmetric optical systems,” J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 15, 2412–2416 (1997). [CrossRef]
  21. K. Yamazoe, “Computation theory of partially coherent imaging by stacked pupil shift matrix,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 25, 3111–3119 (2008). [CrossRef]
  22. R. Socha, D. Van Den Broeke, S. Hsu, J. Fung Chen, T. Laidig, N. Corcoran, U. Hollerbach, K. E. Wampler, X. Shi, and W. Conley, “Contact hole reticle optimization by using interference mapping lithography (IML™),” Proc. SPIE 5377, 222–240 (2004). [CrossRef]
  23. K. Yamazoe and A. R. Neureuther, “Aerial image calculation by eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of a matrix that includes source, pupil and mask,” Proc. SPIE 7640, 76400N (2010). [CrossRef]
  24. W. H. Press, S. A. Teukolsky, W. T. Vetterling, and B. P. Flannery, Numerical Recipes in C, 2nd ed. (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1994), Chap. 2.
  25. B. Noble and J. W. Daniel, Applied Linear Algebra (Prentice-Hall, 1977), Chap. 5.
  26. H. Gamo, “Intensity matrix and degree of coherence,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 47, 976 (1957). [CrossRef]
  27. J. W. Goodman, Introduction to Fourier Optics, 2nd ed. (McGraw-Hill, 1996), Chap. 6.
  28. D. C. Cole, E. Barouch, U. Hollerbach, and S. A. Orszag, “Extending scalar aerial image calculations to higher numerical apertures,” J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 10, 3037–3041 (1992). [CrossRef]
  29. W. Goodman, Statistical Optics, 1st ed. (Wiley-Interscience, 1985), Chap. 7.
  30. E. Wolf, “A macroscopic theory of interference and diffraction of light from finite sources I. Field with a narrow spectral range,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 225, 96–111 (1954). [CrossRef]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.


« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited