On the algebraic characterization of a Mueller matrix in polarization optics I. Identifying a Mueller matrix from its N matrix

Rao, A. V. Gopala; Mallesh, K. S.; Available, Not Available Not

doi:10.1080/095003498151483

Cited by 16 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…M are pure Mueller matrices, and  M is the type-I or type-II [19,20] canonical depolarizer [21], note that, regardless of whether M is type-I or type-II, the central depolarizer  M is preserved under dual retarder transformations [12], are also invariant under dual-retarder transformations.…”

Section: Dual-retarder Transformationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Invariant quantities of a Mueller matrix under rotation and retarder transformations

Gil¹

2015

J. Opt. Soc. Am. A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mueller matrices are defined with respect to appropriate Cartesian reference frames for the representation of the states of polarization of the input and output electromagnetic beams. The polarimetric quantities that are invariant under rotations of the said reference frames about the respective directions of propagation (rotation transformations) provide particularly interesting physical information. Moreover, certain properties are also invariant with respect to the action of birefringent devices located at both sides of the medium under consideration (retarder transformations). The polarimetric properties that remain invariant under rotation and retarder transformations are calculated from any given Mueller matrix and are then analyzed and interpreted, providing significant parameterizations of Mueller matrices in terms of meaningful physical quantities.

show abstract

Section: Dual-retarder Transformationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Invariant quantities of a Mueller matrix under rotation and retarder transformations

Gil¹

2015

J. Opt. Soc. Am. A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A symmetric serial decomposition of a Mueller matrix M was developed by Ossikovski [36] that is closely related to the "normal form" dealt with previously by Xing [9], Sridhar and Simon [37], van der Mee [38], and Gopala Rao et al [39,40]:…”

Section: Symmetric Decompositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transmittance constraints in serial decompositions of depolarizing Mueller matrices: the arrow form of a Mueller matrix

Gil¹

2013

J. Opt. Soc. Am. A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The passivity of the linear components in the main approaches for serial decompositions of depolarizing Mueller matrices [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 13, 1106(1996; J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 26, 1109 (2009)] is dealt with, and it is found that it is not always possible to perform such decompositions in terms of passive components. A compact form of Mueller matrix ("arrow matrix") associated with any given Mueller matrix, which retains, in a condensed manner, the physical properties relative to transmittance, diattenuation, polarizance, and depolarization, is presented.

show abstract

“…A physical admissibility criterion for Mueller matrices has to be defined. This issue has been widely addressed in the literature where several authors have dealt with the physical admissibility of experimentally measured Mueller matrices [7][8][9][10][11]. Many criteria have been proposed to assess the validity of such matrices.…”

Section: Physical Admissibility Of Mueller Matricesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Amongst them, the Jones criterion (also called the criterion for "physical" Mueller matrices) requires that a Mueller matrix is a linear combination, with non-negative coefficients, of at most four pure Mueller matrices (a pure Mueller matrix is obtained from a Jones matrix, see [11] for the complete definition). As stated in [11], the Jones criterion enables to represent a random assembly of Jones filters, thus covering perhaps every possible case of interest in polarization optics. Beyond any controversy about such a criterion, we use in the following the Jones criterion so that a Mueller matrix is defined hereafter as a matrix that verifies this criterion.…”

Section: Physical Admissibility Of Mueller Matricesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimation of Mueller matrices using non-local means filtering

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article addresses the estimation of polarization signatures in the Mueller imaging framework by non-local means filtering. This is an extension of previous work dealing with Stokes signatures. The extension is not straightforward because of the gap in complexity between the Mueller framework and the Stokes framework. The estimation procedure relies on the Cholesky decomposition of the coherency matrix, thereby ensuring the physical admissibility of the estimate. We propose an original parameterization of the boundary of the set of Mueller matrices, which makes our approach possible. The proposed method is fully unsupervised. It allows noise removal and the preservation of edges. Applications to synthetic as well as real data are presented.

show abstract

On the algebraic characterization of a Mueller matrix in polarization optics I. Identifying a Mueller matrix from its N matrix

Cited by 16 publications

References 0 publications

Invariant quantities of a Mueller matrix under rotation and retarder transformations

Invariant quantities of a Mueller matrix under rotation and retarder transformations

Transmittance constraints in serial decompositions of depolarizing Mueller matrices: the arrow form of a Mueller matrix

Estimation of Mueller matrices using non-local means filtering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About