Difference between revisions of "ParSA Results"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
=== Interferograms === | === Interferograms === | ||
{|align=center | {|align=center | ||
− | |[[Image:testprob-5-2008.png|thumb|The test interferogram created from three random surfaces.]] | + | |[[Image:testprob-5-2008.png|thumb|Figure 1: The test interferogram created from three random surfaces.]] |
− | |[[Image:bestsol-5-2008.png|thumb|The best solution found amongst several simulated annealing runs.]] | + | |[[Image:bestsol-5-2008.png|thumb|Figure 2: The best solution found amongst several simulated annealing runs.]] |
|} | |} | ||
The set of images in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 depict the test interferogram analyzed using ParSA and the best interferogram solution found by ParSA. When compared visually, the two interferograms are nearly indistinguishable. This comparison shows that the solution found by the ParSA algorithm is a good one. | The set of images in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 depict the test interferogram analyzed using ParSA and the best interferogram solution found by ParSA. When compared visually, the two interferograms are nearly indistinguishable. This comparison shows that the solution found by the ParSA algorithm is a good one. |
Revision as of 06:48, 2 June 2008
Solutions
Interferograms
The set of images in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 depict the test interferogram analyzed using ParSA and the best interferogram solution found by ParSA. When compared visually, the two interferograms are nearly indistinguishable. This comparison shows that the solution found by the ParSA algorithm is a good one.
Surfaces
Fig. 2 and Fig. 4 show the front and back surfaces of the diamond wafer used to create the test interferogram depicted in Fig. 1. Fig. 3 and Fig. 5 show the solutions found by the ParSA algorithm which generated the interferogram shown in Fig. 2.