Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 292

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of rotation and translation on the expected benefit of an ideal method to correct the eye’s higher-order aberrations

Guirao, Antonio, Williams, David R., Cox, Ian G.·2001·Journal of the Optical Society of America A

Abstract

An ideal correcting method, such as a customized contact lens, laser refractive surgery, or adaptive optics, that corrects higher-order aberrations as well as defocus and astigmatism could improve vision. The benefit achieved with this ideal method will be limited by decentration. To estimate the significance of this potential limitation we studied the effect on image quality expected when an ideal correcting method translates or rotates with respect to the eye's pupil. Actual wave aberrations were obtained from ten human eyes for a 7.3-mm pupil with a Shack-Hartmann sensor. We computed the residual aberrations that appear as a result of translation or rotation of an otherwise ideal correction. The model is valid for adaptive optics, contact lenses, and phase plates, but it constitutes only a first approximation to the laser refractive surgery case where tissue removal occurs. Calculations suggest that the typical decentrations will reduce only slightly the optical benefits expected from an ideal correcting method. For typical decentrations the ideal correcting method offers a benefit in modulation 2-4 times higher (1.5-2 times in white light) than with a standard correction of defocus and astigmatism. We obtained analytical expressions that show the impact of translation and rotation on individual Zernike terms. These calculations also reveal which aberrations are most beneficial to correct. We provided practical rules to implement a selective correction depending on the amount of decentration. An experimental study was performed with an aberrated artificial eye corrected with an adaptive optics system, validating the theoretical predictions. The results in a keratoconic subject, also corrected with adaptive optics, showed that important benefits are obtained despite decentrations in highly aberrated eyes.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1364/josaa.18.001003

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 19 references

Cited by

See all 292

Metadata

Authors
Guirao, A., Williams, D. R., & Cox, I. G.
Venue
Journal of the Optical Society of America A
Published
2001-05-01
Volume
18
Issue
5
Pages
1003
ISSN
  • 1084-7529 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-8532
OpenAlex
W1985953097
Cited by
292
References
19
FWCI
8.25
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: Effect of rotation and translation on the expected benefit of an ideal method to correct the eye’s higher-order aberrations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1364/josaa.18.001003
The paper
Guirao, A., Williams, D. R., & Cox, I. G. (2001). Effect of rotation and translation on the expected benefit of an ideal method to correct the eye’s higher-order aberrations. Journal of the Optical Society of America A. https://doi.org/10.1364/josaa.18.001003

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.