2015
DOI: 10.1080/15599612.2015.1034903
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Scanning Electron Microscope Calibration Using a Multi-Image Non-Linear Minimization Process

Abstract: International audienceA scanning electron microscope (SEM) calibrating approach based on non-linear minimization procedure is presented in this article 1. Both the intrinsic parameters and the extrinsic parameters estimations are achieved simultaneously by minimizing the registration error. The proposed approach considers multi-images of a multi-scale calibration pattern view from different positions and orientations. Since the projection geometry of the scanning electron microscope is different from that of a… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The necessity of this high magnification rests upon two factors : firstly, as the form of our object is complex (one dimension is much smaller than two others) the camera must be close enough to be able to detect all of the edges; secondly, the size of visual field should be sufficient to cover all space of object movement necessary to microassembly tasks. So, we encounter the hypothesis also presented in works with Scanning Electron Microscope (24), that at high magnification the projection rays are parallel to each other and are perpendicular to the image plane, which implies the use of parallel projection model. Nevertheless, several alternative solutions may be used to measure the displacement following Z c axis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…The necessity of this high magnification rests upon two factors : firstly, as the form of our object is complex (one dimension is much smaller than two others) the camera must be close enough to be able to detect all of the edges; secondly, the size of visual field should be sufficient to cover all space of object movement necessary to microassembly tasks. So, we encounter the hypothesis also presented in works with Scanning Electron Microscope (24), that at high magnification the projection rays are parallel to each other and are perpendicular to the image plane, which implies the use of parallel projection model. Nevertheless, several alternative solutions may be used to measure the displacement following Z c axis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…The calibration process aims to obtain the parameters of the geometric model that define the relationship between the world coordinate of the target and its projection in the image plane. There are two types of classical projection models, namely, perspective projection and parallel projection, which have been proven to be sufficient for most optical and electron microvision systems [51]. In general, different micro-vision systems can be classified into either perspective projection model or parallel projection model, which are listed in Table II.…”
Section: B Geometric Models and Calibration Methods Of The Typical Micro-vision Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Different from OMs, special multi-scale calibration patterns are needed for calibrating SEMs under variational magnifications. For instance, multi-scale chessboard grids are used to determine the internal and external parameters of SEMs in the magnification range of 300× to 10000× by iteratively nonlinear minimizing the registration error [66]. Multi-scale circular patterns were designed to obtain the perspective matrix based on the general imaging model under magnifications from 20× to 500× [64], [67].…”
Section: B Geometric Models and Calibration Methods Of The Typical Micro-vision Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Besides, in [15] it has been proposed to use image gradient information to perform vision-based positioning tasks and a similar process could be envisioned for an autofocus task. However, due to the parallel projection model at high magnification which is inherent to a SEM [2], the perspective projection-based control law proposed in [15] cannot be employed for the SEM. To tackle this problem, we propose in this section a direct projection model-free approach to derive the control law for full scale autofocus.…”
Section: Sharpness Function For Closed-loop Controlmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Out of the two, passive methods are commonly employed for microscopic devices. Since the geometry and projection model of a SEM are different to optical systems [1,2], the autofocus process is different. Most of the autofocus methods are based on evaluating the image sharpness score i.e., the score should reach a single optimum of a selected sharpness function at the in-focus image.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%