The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Ghost imaging: from quantum to classical to computational
Abstract
Ghost-imaging experiments correlate the outputs from two photodetectors: a high-spatial-resolution (scanning pinhole or CCD array) detector that measures a field that has not interacted with the object to be imaged, and a bucket (single-pixel) detector that collects a field that has interacted with the object. We give a comprehensive review of ghost imaging—within a unified Gaussian-state framework—presenting detailed analyses of its resolution, field of view, image contrast, and signal-to-noise ratio behavior. We consider three classes of illumination: thermal-state (classical), biphoton-state (quantum), and classical-state phase-sensitive light. The first two have been employed in a variety of ghost-imaging demonstrations. The third is the classical Gaussian state that produces ghost images that most closely mimic those obtained from biphoton illumination. The insights we develop lead naturally to a new, single-beam approach to ghost imaging, called computational ghost imaging, in which only the bucket detector is required. We provide quantitative results while simultaneously emphasizing the underlying physics of ghost imaging. The key to developing the latter understanding lies in the coherence behavior of a pair of Gaussian-state light beams with either phase-insensitive or phase-sensitive cross correlation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Optical Coherence and Quantum Optics
Mandel, L., & Wolf, E. (1995) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139644105 · Cited by 8,356
Proposed Experiment to Test Local Hidden-Variable Theories
Clauser, J. F., Horne, M. A., Shimony, A., & Holt, R. A. (1969) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.23.880 · Cited by 7,573
The Quantum Theory of Optical Communications
Shapiro, J. H. (2009) · IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics · doi:10.1109/jstqe.2009.2024959 · Cited by 145
Self-citation
Cited by
Quantum theory of superresolution for two incoherent optical point sources
Tsang, M., Nair, R., & Lu, X.-M. (2016) · Physical Review X · doi:10.1103/physrevx.6.031033 · Cited by 482
Experimental X-Ray Ghost Imaging
Pelliccia, D., Rack, A., Scheel, M., Cantelli, V., & Paganin, D. M. (2016) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.117.113902 · Cited by 367
Metadata
- Authors
- Erkmen, B. I., & Shapiro, J. H.
- Venue
- Advances in Optics and Photonics
- Publisher
- Optica Publishing Group
- Published
- 2010-08-20
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 405
- ISSN
- 1943-8206 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1971500547
- Cited by
- 483
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 5.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ghost imaging: from quantum to classical to computational. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1364/aop.2.000405
- The paper
- Erkmen, B. I., & Shapiro, J. H. (2010). Ghost imaging: from quantum to classical to computational. Advances in Optics and Photonics. https://doi.org/10.1364/aop.2.000405
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.