direct retrieval of object information using inverse solutions of dynamical electron diffraction max...
TRANSCRIPT
Direct Retrieval of Object Information using Inverse Solutions of Dynamical Electron Diffraction
Max Planck Institute of Microstructure PhysicsHalle/Saale, [email protected]
http://www.mpi-halle.de
Kurt Scheerschmidt
Quantitative Analysis: Trial-&-Error or Inverse Problems
Confidence: a priori Data versus Regularization
trial-and-errorimage analysis
direct objectreconstruction
1. objectmodeling
2. wave simulation
3. image process
4. likelihoodmeasure
repetition
parameter &potential
reconstruction
wavereconstruction
?
image
?
Inversion ? no iteration
same ambiguities
additional instabilities
parameter& potential
atomicdisplacementsexit object
wave
imagedirect interpretation by data reduction:Fourier filteringQUANTITEM
Fuzzy & Neuro-NetSrain analysis
deviations fromreference structures:
displacement field (Head)algebraic discretization
reference beam (holography)defocus series (Kirkland, van Dyck …)
Gerchberg-Saxton (Jansson)tilt-series, voltage variation
multi-slice inversion(van Dyck, Griblyuk, Lentzen,
Allen, Spargo, Koch)Pade-inversion (Spence) non-Convex sets (Spence)
local linearization
= M(X) 0
= M(X0) 0 + M(X0)(X-X0) 0
Assumptions:
- object: weakly distorted crystal
- described by unknown parameter set X={t, K,Vg, u}
- approximations of t0, K0 a priori known
M needs analytic solutions for inversion
Perturbation: eigensolution , C for K, V yields analytic solution of and its derivatives
for K+K, V+V with tr() + {1/(i-j)}
= C-1(1+)-1 {exp(2i(t+t)} (1+)C
The inversion needs generalized matrices due to different numbersof unknowns in X and measured reflexes in disturbed by noise
Generalized Inverse (Penrose-Moore):
X= X0+(MTM)-1MT.[exp- X]
A0 Ag1 Ag2 Ag3
P0 Pg1 Pg2 Pg3
...
...exp
X= X0+(MTM)-1MT.[exp- X]
i i i
j j jX X X...
t(i,j) Kx(i,j) Ky(i,j)
Regularized Generalized Inverse
X=(MTC1M + C2)-1 MT
as Maximum-Likelihood-Estimate of Gauss-distributed Errors
||ex-th||2 + ||X||2 = Min
with defect (ex-th)†C1(ex-th) (ex†C1ex)-1
and constraint XTC2Xwhich is physically interpretable as:
Weighting C1=W†
ghWgh
Smoothing C2=DTijDij
data itself: Dij=i-ip,j-jp
second derivative: Dij=-2i-ip,j-jp+i-ip±1,j-jp±1
-lg()
lg()Regularization
Kx(i,j)/a*
Ky(i,j)/a*
t(i,j)/Å
Retrieval with iterative fit of the confidence region
lg()
step
step
< t > / Å
relative beamincidence to zone axis [110]
[-1,1,0]
[002]
iii
iii
iiiiii
(i-iii increasing smoothing)
Ge-CdTe, 300kVSample: D. SmithHolo: H. Lichte,
M.Lehmann
10nm
object waveamplitude
object wavephase
FT
A000
P000
A1-11
P1-11
A1-1-1
A-111
P-111
P1-1-1
A-11-1
P-11-1
A-220
P-220
Kx(i,j)/a*
Ky(i,j)/a*
t(i,j)/Å
set 1: Ge set 2: CdTe dVo/Vo = 0.02% dV’o/V’o = 0.8%
Ky(i,j)/a*
Kx(i,j)/a*
K(i,j)/a*
t(i,j)/ Å
model/reco input 7 / 7 15 / 15 15 / 9 15 / 7beams used Influence of Modeling Errors
CONCLUSIONS & OUTLOOK
OBJECT RECONSTRUCTION:
Trial-&-Error Matching of Amplitudes & Phases
as well as
Inversion via local Linearization
ILL-POSEDNESS:
Ambiguity & Instability Generalization & RegularizationModeling Error & Confidence a priori Data
Thanks for your attention
Thanks for cooperation:
H.Lichte, M.Lehmann (Uni-Dresden)
regularization physically motivated
Assumption: complex amplitudes are regular
Cauchy relations: a/x = a./y
a/y = -a./x
Linear inversion: t(x+1,y)-2t(x,y)+t(x-1,y)=0
t(x,y+1)-2t(x,y)+t(x,y-1)=0
0
1
-1
1
.6
.2
.5
-.5
Confidence range?
Kx(i,j)/a* Ky(i,j)/a* K(i,j)/a* t(i,j)/ Å
Properly posed problems (J. Hadamard 1902)Existence
UniquenessStability
if at least one solution But: exists which is unique and continuous with data
implies determinism (Laplaciandeamon, classical physics) ofintegrable systems for knowninitial/boundary conditions
suitable theory/model& a priori knowledge
inverse 1.kind
solution via construction
but small confidence(uniqueness/stability)
Direct & Inverse: black box gedankenexperiment
operator Af
input
g
output
waveimage
thicknesslocal orientation
structure & defectscompositionmicroscope theory, hypothesis, model of
scattering and imaging
direct: g=A<f experiment, measurement
invers 1.kind: f=A-1<g parameter determination
invers 2.kind: A=g$f -1 identification, interpretation
a priori knowledgeintuition & induction
additional data
if unique & stable inverse A-1 exists
ill-posed & insufficient data => least square
restricted information channel (D. van Dyck)
a priori information: object & additional experiments
amorph1023coordinates
FT white noise
medium range orderPDF, ADF
FT densebut structured S(r)
crystalspace group with
basis / displacements
FT discreteconvolution withdefects and shape
Reference wave:Rexp(2ir)
Diffraction:
u(u-)
Aberrations:uuexp(-D-i
Interference: RF-1{uu}
Hologram:
h(R) = * = 1+(R) *(R) + 2|R| cos(2ir+R)
Reconstruction: F-1{h(R)} = (u) +d(u)
+[uexp(-D-i(u-)
+[ uexp(-D+i(u+)
Diffraction:
uF{(R,t)} = g(u)*(u-k-g)
Object wave:(R,t) g exp (2i(k+g)r)
Uniqueness (J. Spence):
Scattering Matrix: S = e2iAt
however: t ± n/Re[] multiplicity
SS-1
=1 for all t => S(A)=S(B) only if A=B
Uniqueness (D.M. Barnett):
/z ~ gu/z => series expansion of u => unique coefficient relations