Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
169 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Resolution Limit of Single-Photon LiDAR (2403.17719v2)

Published 25 Mar 2024 in eess.SP and cs.CV

Abstract: Single-photon Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) systems are often equipped with an array of detectors for improved spatial resolution and sensing speed. However, given a fixed amount of flux produced by the laser transmitter across the scene, the per-pixel Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) will decrease when more pixels are packed in a unit space. This presents a fundamental trade-off between the spatial resolution of the sensor array and the SNR received at each pixel. Theoretical characterization of this fundamental limit is explored. By deriving the photon arrival statistics and introducing a series of new approximation techniques, the Mean Squared Error (MSE) of the maximum-likelihood estimator of the time delay is derived. The theoretical predictions align well with simulations and real data.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (46)
  1. Estimating the arrival times of photon-limited laser pulses in the presence of shot and speckle noise. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A, 4(6):1080–1088, 1987.
  2. LiDAR waveform-based analysis of depth images constructed using sparse single-photon data. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 25(5):1935–1946, 2016.
  3. Israel Bar-David. Communication under the poisson regime. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 15(1):31–37, 1969.
  4. Alberto Boretti. A perspective on single-photon LiDAR systems. Microwave and Optical Technology Letters, 66(1):e33918, 2024.
  5. Stanley H. Chan. Introduction to Probability for Data Science. Michigan Publishing, 2021.
  6. Scattering and gathering for spatially varying blurs. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 2024. To appear. Available online at https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.05687.
  7. Image reconstruction for quanta image sensors using deep neural networks. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pages 6543–6547, 2018.
  8. Peter Coates. The correction for photon ‘pile-up’ in the measurement of radiative lifetimes. Journal of Physics E: Scientific Instruments, 1(8):878, 1968.
  9. A SPAD-based QVGA image sensor for single-photon counting and quanta imaging. IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, 63(1):189–196, 2016.
  10. Optimal threshold design for quanta image sensor. IEEE Transactions on Computational Imaging, 4(1):99–111, 2018.
  11. Maximum likelihood time-of-arrival estimation of optical pulses via photon-counting photodetectors. In 2009 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory, pages 1909–1913, 2009.
  12. Eric R. Fossum. The Invention and Development of CMOS Image Sensors, chapter 23, pages 281–291. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2023.
  13. The quanta image sensor: Every photon counts. Sensors, 16(8), 2016.
  14. Asynchronous single-photon 3D imaging. In 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pages 7908–7917, 2019a.
  15. Photon-flooded single-photon 3D cameras. In 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 6763–6772, 2019b.
  16. Single-photon detection for long-range imaging and sensing. Optica, 10(9):1124–1141, 2023.
  17. Sub-picosecond photon-efficient 3D imaging using single-photon sensors. Scientific Reports, 8(1):17726, 2018.
  18. A 192×128192128192\times 128192 × 128 time correlated SPAD image sensor in 40-nm CMOS technology. IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, 54(7):1907–1916, 2019.
  19. Steven Kay. Fundamentals of Statistical Signal Processing: Practical Algorithm Development. Prentice-Hall PTR, 2013.
  20. First-photon imaging. Science, 343(6166):58–61, 2014.
  21. CASPI: collaborative photon processing for active single-photon imaging. Nature Communications, 14(1):3158, 2023.
  22. Single-photon LiDAR for canopy detection with a multi-channel Si SPAD at 1064 nm. Optics & Laser Technology, 157:108749, 2023.
  23. Single-photon 3D imaging with deep sensor fusion. ACM Trans. Graph., 37(4):113.1–113.12, 2018.
  24. Quanta burst photography. ACM Trans. Graph., 39(4), 2020.
  25. Kilometer-range, high resolution depth imaging via 1560 nm wavelength single-photon detection. Opt. Express, 21(7):8904–8915, 2013.
  26. High-speed object detection with a single-photon time-of-flight image sensor. Opt. Express, 29(21):33184–33196, 2021.
  27. Megapixel time-gated SPAD image sensor for 2D and 3D imaging applications. Optica, 7(4):346–354, 2020.
  28. Signal processing based pile-up compensation for gated single-photon avalanche diodes. 2018. Available at https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.07437.
  29. Adaptive gating for single-photon 3D imaging. In 2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 16333–16342, 2022.
  30. Luminance-depth reconstruction from compressed time-of-flight histograms. IEEE Transactions on Computational Imaging, 8:148–161, 2022.
  31. Single photon detectors for automotive LiDAR applications: State-of-the-art and research challenges. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics, 30(1: Single-Photon Technologies and Applications):1–20, 2024.
  32. A few photons among many: Unmixing signal and noise for photon-efficient active imaging. IEEE Transactions on Computational Imaging, 3(3):445–459, 2017.
  33. Advances in single-photon Lidar for autonomous vehicles: Working principles, challenges, and recent advances. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 37(4):62–71, 2020.
  34. A 32×32 50ps resolution 10 bit time to digital converter array in 130nm CMOS for time correlated imaging. In 2009 IEEE Custom Integrated Circuits Conference, pages 77–80, 2009.
  35. Fundamental limits to depth imaging with single-photon detector array sensors. Nature Scientific Reports, 13(1):176, 2023.
  36. Information in a photon: Relating entropy and maximum-likelihood range estimation using single-photon counting detectors. In 2013 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing, pages 83–87, 2013.
  37. Photon-efficient computational 3-D and reflectivity imaging with single-photon detectors. IEEE Transactions on Computational Imaging, 1(2):112–125, 2015.
  38. Random Point Processes in Time and Space. Springer, 1991.
  39. Real-time 3D reconstruction from single-photon lidar data using plug-and-play point cloud denoisers. Nature Communications, 10(1):4984, 2019.
  40. Histogram-less LiDAR through SPAD response linearization. IEEE Sensors Journal, 24(4):4656–4669, 2024.
  41. A 512 × 512 SPAD image sensor with integrated gating for widefield FLIM. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics, 25(1):1–12, 2019.
  42. SPADs and SiPMs arrays for long-range high-speed light detection and ranging LiDAR. Sensors, 21(11), 2021.
  43. A 500 × 500 dual-gate SPAD imager with 100 IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, 69(6):2865–2872, 2022.
  44. Passive ultra-wideband single-photon imaging. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pages 8135–8146, 2023.
  45. A theory of fermat paths for non-line-of-sight shape reconstruction. In 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 6793–6802, 2019.
  46. Bits from photons: Oversampled image acquisition using binary poisson statistics. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 21(4):1421–1436, 2012.
Citations (3)

Summary

  • The paper demonstrates that increasing pixel density reduces per-pixel photon count, thereby lowering SNR and increasing depth estimation error.
  • The authors introduce innovative approximation techniques that yield a closed-form expression for the mean squared error based on practical sensor parameters.
  • Simulations validate the theoretical model under various noise and pulse conditions, underscoring its value for designing optimized LiDAR sensor arrays.

An Expert Overview of the Resolution Limit of Single-Photon LiDAR

The technical manuscript titled "Resolution Limit of Single-Photon LiDAR" by Chan et al. explores the sophisticated interplay between spatial resolution and signal quality in modern LiDAR systems. Single-photon LiDAR systems, known for their exceptional sensitivity and utility in fields like autonomous navigation and 3D mapping, pose particular challenges when attempting to balance high resolution with adequate signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). This paper aims at characterizing these trade-offs with rigor, providing insight into the mean squared error (MSE) behavior of LiDAR depth estimates.

Core Contributions

The authors propose a fundamental analysis of the limitations imposed by the Poisson nature of photon arrival processes. As more pixels are densely packed into a detector array to achieve higher resolution, each pixel receives fewer photons due to the fixed photon flux. This inherently decreases the per-pixel SNR, leading to increased noise in depth estimations. The central hypothesis examined is whether it is feasible to derive, ideally in closed form, the MSE of depth estimates as a direct function of spatial pixel density.

Key contributions include:

  1. Generalization Beyond Single Pixel: While prior theoretical work predominantly addresses single-pixel analyses, this work expands the domain to include entire arrays, providing a more holistic view of sensor performance in practical settings.
  2. Novel Approximation Techniques: By integrating new theoretical approximation methodologies, the authors manage to derive MSE values for LiDAR systems. Closed-form solutions are provided under practical assumptions, showcasing their applicability in both simulated and real-world scenarios.
  3. Closed-form Expression for MSE: The result is a concise yet interpretable expression that highlights the pivotal roles of photon flux, scene slope, optical Gaussian spread, and time pulse width in determining resolution efficiency.

Numerical Validation and Impact

Simulations validate the theoretical predictions across various conditions, including different pulse shapes and noise floors. The paper's findings suggest that the optimal resolution corresponds to minimizing MSE, revealing a U-shaped dependency of error on the number of pixels. Notably, the theory holds under both zero and non-zero background noise cases, demonstrating its robustness.

Implications and Future Prospects

The implications of this research extend across both theoretical and practical fronts. For theorists, the closed-form MSE expression offers a baseline for further studies involving complex noise models or multi-photon dynamics. Practically, the paper provides engineers a quantifiable means to design sensor arrays that balance resolution demands with noise constraints, essential for applications in dynamic and uncertain environmental conditions encountered in autonomous systems and advanced imaging.

From a future outlook, incorporating advanced noise mitigation strategies, such as those encountered in scatter-prone environments (e.g., fog), into the theoretical framework could greatly benefit LiDAR design. Additionally, investigating the potential of adaptive resolution techniques based on scene complexity or photon flux estimates could refine these systems further.

The research by Chan et al. marks a crucial step in understanding and optimizing single-photon LiDAR performance, aligning theoretical expectations with practical engineering constraints. This exploration serves as a valuable touchstone for ongoing developments in the ever-evolving domain of photon-based sensing technologies.