arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1012.1250

A Comparison Between Lucky Imaging and Speckle Stabilization for Astronomical Imaging

M. Keremedjiev·S. S. Eikenberry
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The new technique of Speckle Stabilization has great potential to provide optical imaging data at the highest angular resolutions from the ground. While Speckle Stabilization was initially conceived for integral field spectroscopic analyses, the technique shares many similarities with speckle imaging (specifically shift-and-add and Lucky Imaging). Therefore, it is worth comparing the two for imaging applications. We have modeled observations on a 2.5-meter class telescope to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the two techniques. While the differences are relatively minor, we find that Speckle Stabilization is a viable competitor to current Lucky Imaging systems. Specifically, we find that Speckle Stabilization is 3.35 times more efficient (where efficiency is defined as signal-to-noise per observing interval) than shift-and-add and able to detect targets 1.42 magnitudes fainter when using a standard system. If we employ a high-speed shutter to compare to Lucky Imaging at 1% image selection, Speckle Stabilization is 1.28 times more efficient and 0.31 magnitudes more sensitive. However, when we incorporate potential modifications to Lucky Imaging systems we find the advantages are significantly mitigated and even reversed in the 1% frame selection cases. In particular, we find that in the limiting case of Optimal Lucky Imaging, that is zero read noise {\it and} photon counting, we find Lucky Imaging is 1.80 times more efficient and 0.96 magnitudes more sensitive than Speckle Stabilization. For the cases in between, we find there is a gradation in advantages to the different techniques depending on target magnitude, fraction of frames used and system modifications.

Explore related subjects

astro-ph.IM

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M. Keremedjiev, S. S. Eikenberry. 2010-12-06. A Comparison Between Lucky Imaging and Speckle Stabilization for Astronomical Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1086/658356

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Parallel adaptive reweighting importance sampling for Bayesian astrophysics

Efficient sampling from high-dimensional, multi-modal posteriors is a central challenge in Bayesian inference across the physical sciences. Gravitational-wave (GW) astronomy, where likelihood evaluations are computationally expensive and posteriors are complex, is one application motivating this work. Popular families of methods like Markov-chain Monte Carlo, nested sampling, and importance sampling all rely on proposal distributions to guide exploration. Because prior knowledge of the target is often limited, practitioners can adopt adaptive proposals that iteratively refine themselves using information gained from previously drawn samples. Traditional adaptive strategies, however, struggle in high-dimensional multi-modal settings: complex, non-linear correlations are hard to capture, and hyperparameters typically require tedious, problem-specific tuning. To address these issues, we introduce Parallel Adaptive Reweighting Importance Sampling (PARIS; descriptively, ``seed sampling''). PARIS models its proposal as a Gaussian mixture whose component centers are the existing samples and whose component weights match the current importance weights. New draws from the proposal therefore concentrate around high-weight regions, while candidate points in unexplored areas receive intentionally inflated weights. As the algorithm continuously reweights all samples up to the latest proposal, any initial over-weighting self-corrects once additional neighbor samples are collected. To enable rapid reweighting, we present an efficient update scheme and evaluate PARIS on illustrative toy problems and more realistic gravitational-wave parameter estimation tasks. PARIS achieves accurate posterior reconstruction and evidence estimation with substantially fewer function evaluations than competing approaches, highlighting its promise for widespread use in astrophysical data analysis.

astro-ph.IM↗
arXiv2026

Ising noise filter: physics-informed filtering for particle detectors

We present the Ising noise filter, a highly portable, graph-based pre-filtering algorithm for early-stage background suppression in particle accelerators and astrophysical detectors. Standard noise rejection methods relying on track fitting suffer from severe combinatorial explosion. Our method bypasses this by mapping individual detector hits to a network of binary spins and minimizing an energy functional. The interaction kernels are physics-informed, tailored to the underlying physics and geometry of the experiment. We demonstrate the efficacy of this approach in two distinct experimental regimes. Applied to the Baikal-GVD neutrino telescope the filter yields fast, standard-quality noise rejection with 96.8% recall for astrophysical neutrinos. For the SPD detector at the NICA collider the filter attains recall of 97% on a toy Monte Carlo sample. Furthermore, when combined with a Peterson--Hopfield network for track finding, our physics-informed coupling improves the TrackML score from 0.5 to 0.95.

astro-ph.IM↗
arXiv2026

Uber-calibration-based Two-level Radial-velocity Zero-point Correction for APOGEE

APOGEE delivers high-resolution, near-infrared spectroscopy and highly precise radial velocities (RVs), with extensive repeat observations spanning more than a decade. Long-term RV repeatability is nevertheless limited by instrumental zero-point systematics: exposure-to-exposure drift and fiber-dependent offsets that are only partially tracked by lamp-based wavelength calibration, and that can evolve as fibers are serviced or replaced. We infer and remove these zero points directly from the published per-visit RVs using an uber-calibration framework based on shared repeat observations. We solve sequentially for two sets of minimal calibration units: (plate, night) exposure-level offsets and time-dependent (fiber, observing year) offsets. We apply the method independently to APO and LCO DR17 and to APO DR19. After correction, the same-fiber repeatability within two days reaches a limiting precision of ~14 m/s, and the long-baseline single-visit precision improves by a factor of two from 98.2 to 44.7 m/s. We release per-visit, value-added RV catalogs for DR17 (APO+LCO) and DR19 (APO) containing 3,501,727 visits (3,336,141 fully corrected) of 930,519 unique stars, enabling more reliable RV variability, binary, and Galactic-dynamics studies.

astro-ph.IM↗