Unified theory of ghost imaging with Gaussian-state light

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 77, Issue 4, 2008, Pages

  Erkmen, Baris I ^a   Shapiro, Jeffrey H ^a  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUTOCORRELATION; ELECTRON ENERGY LEVELS; GAUSSIAN BEAMS; PHOTOCURRENTS; QUANTUM COMPUTERS;

GAUSSIAN STATE SOURCES; GAUSSIAN STATES; PHASE SENSITIVE CROSS CORRELATIONS; QUANTUM SIGNATURE;

IMAGING SYSTEMS;

EID: 41849147506     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.043809     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Other ghost-imaging configurations replace the scanning pinhole detector with a charge-coupled-device (CCD) array for parallel data acquisition or separate the object plane and the detection plane to allow greater flexibility in implementation or image in reflectance rather than transmission. These variations do not affect the fundamental physics that governs ghost imaging, and, with the exception of separating the object and detection planes, will not be discussed herein.
2. T. B. Pittman, Y. H. Shih, D. V. Strekalov, and A. V. Sergienko, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.52.R3429 52, R3429 (1995).
3. A. Valencia, G. Scarcelli, M. DAngelo, and Y. Shih, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.063601 94, 063601 (2005).
4. F. Ferri, D. Magatti, A. Gatti, M. Bache, E. Brambilla, and L. A. Lugiato, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.183602 94, 183602 (2005).
5. A. Gatti, E. Brambilla, M. Bache, and L. A. Lugiato, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.70.013802 70, 013802 (2004).
6. A. Gatti, E. Brambilla, M. Bache, and L. A. Lugiato, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.093602 93, 093602 (2004).
7. R. S. Bennink, S. J. Bentley, R. W. Boyd, and J. C. Howell, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.033601 92, 033601 (2004).
8. M. DAngelo, A. Valencia, M. H. Rubin, and Y. Shih, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.72.013810 72, 013810 (2005).
9. Y. Cai and S.-Y. Zhu, Phys. Rev. E PLEEE8 1063-651X 10.1103/PhysRevE.71. 056607 71, 056607 (2005).
10. G. Scarcelli, V. Berardi, and Y. Shih, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.063602 96, 063602 (2006).
11. H. P. Yuen and J. H. Shapiro, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory IETTAW 0018-9448 10.1109/TIT.1978.1055958 24, 657 (1978).
12. H. P. Yuen and J. H. Shapiro, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory IETTAW 0018-9448 10.1109/TIT.1980.1056132 26, 78 (1980).
13. J. H. Shapiro, Proc. SPIE PSISDG 0277-786X 10.1117/12.504770 5111, 382 (2003).
14. R. Loudon, The Quantum Theory of Light, 3rd ed. (Oxford University Press, New York, 2000), Chap..
15. R. M. Gagliardi and S. Karp, Optical Communications (Wiley, New York, 1976).
16. R. G. Gallager, Discrete Stochastic Processes (Kluwer Academic, Boston, 1996), Chap..
17. J. W. Goodman, Statistical Optics (Wiley, New York, 2000).
18. J. H. Shapiro, Quantum Semiclassic. Opt. QUSOEC 1355-5111 10.1088/1355-5111/10/3/014 10, 567 (1998).
19. L. Mandel and E. Wolf, Optical Coherence and Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1995), Chaps., an.
20. J. H. Shapiro and K.-X. Sun, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 11, 1130 (1994). 0740-3224
21. J. H. Shapiro, H. P. Yuen, and J. A. Machado Mata, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory IETTAW 0018-9448 10.1109/TIT.1979.1056033 25, 179 (1979).
22. The signal and reference fields obtained from spontaneous parametric down-conversion (SPDC) will not have space-time correlation functions that take these specific forms, because of the space-time coupling that is inherent in SPDC phase-matching relations. However, these assumptions, which are commonly employed in coherence theory, simplify the analytical treatment without compromising the fundamental physics that yield a ghost image.
23. A. Papoulis, Probability, Random Variables, and Stochastic Processes, 3rd ed. (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1991), Chap..
24. F. N. C. Wong, T. H. Kim, and J. H. Shapiro, Laser Phys. LAPHEJ 1054-660X 10.1134/S1054660X06110053 16, 1517 (2006).
25. E. Brambilla, A. Gatti, M. Bache, and L. A. Lugiato, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.69.023802 69, 023802 (2004).
26. R. W. Boyd, Nonlinear Optics, 2nd ed. (Academic, Boston, 2003), Chap..
27. B. I. Erkmen and J. H. Shapiro, Proc. SPIE PSISDG 0277-786X 10.1117/12.679546 6305, 63050G (2006).
28. B. E. A. Saleh, A. F. Abouraddy, A. V. Sergienko, and M. C. Teich, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.62.043816 62, 043816 (2000).
29. The distinction between autocorrelation and cross-correlation propagation is irrelevant here, because both the signal and reference beams undergo identical transformations. Thus, even though we state our results only for the cross-correlation functions, these results also apply to autocorrelation propagation.
30. Field of view usually refers to a solid-angle region, but we will use the intensity radius at a transverse plane as our field-of-view measure.
31. Y. Shih, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. IJSQEN 1077-260X 10.1109/JSTQE.2007.902724 13, 1016 (2007).
32. J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, and R. A. Holt, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.23.880 23, 880 (1969).
33. A. S. Deif, Advanced Matrix Theory for Scientists and Engineers, 2nd ed. (Abacus, New York, 1991).