English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Ghost imaging has been receiving increasing interest for possible use as aremote-sensing system. There has been little comparison, however, between ghostimaging and the imaging laser radars with which it would be competing. Towardthat end, this paper presents a performance comparison between a pulsed,computational ghost imager and a pulsed, floodlight-illumination imaging laserradar. Both are considered for range-resolving (3D) imaging of a collection ofrough-surfaced objects at standoff ranges in the presence of atmosphericturbulence. Their spatial resolutions and signal-to-noise ratios are evaluatedas functions of the system parameters, and these results are used to assesseach system's performance trade-offs. Scenarios in which a reflectiveghost-imaging system has advantages over a laser radar are identified.

Computational ghost imaging versus imaging laser radar for 3D imaging