Abstract
In our original paper [1], the caption of Fig. 1 states that the amplitude parameter used to generate the figure is A = 100. However, the peak of the Gaussian profile clearly extends to 200, so the caption is in error. The model for generating this figure uses A = 200. In addition, the paper refers to A as the “peak amplitude”. However, a look through the various equations throughout the paper shows that the units of the detection variableg correspond to A multiplied to dx . Since dx is the pixel width (in units of, say, microns), the units of A must therefore be the detection variablevolts, irradiance, unitless, etc., depending on the detection system) divided by length. This change extends to the use of A in all of the paper equations and corrects the units in the variance equations but does not affect any of the paper conclusions.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 4710 |
| Number of pages | 1 |
| Journal | Applied optics |
| Volume | 61 |
| Issue number | 16 |
| DOIs |
|
| State | Published - Jun 1 2022 |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics
- Engineering (miscellaneous)
- Electrical and Electronic Engineering
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Erratum: Gaussian profile estimation in one dimension (Applied Optics (2007) 46 (5374–5383) DOI: 10.1364/AO.46.005374)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS