Table 1.

DoF-extension performance comparisons of E2E-BPF against reference pupil designs

Pupil design	Post-processing	Scene 1 (Lenna)	Scene 2 (Mouse intestine section)	820 images from test dataset37	${\mathrm{DoF}}_{\mathrm{A}}$/${\mathrm{DoF}}_{\mathrm{clear}}$
		RMSE/SSIM	RMSE/SSIM	RMSE/SSIM (mean ± s.d.)
Clear aperture	-	0.100/0.570	0.092/0.634	0.056 ± 0.034/0.766 ± 0.127	1.00
Roper et al.27	U-Net	0.065/0.679	0.047/0.820	0.023 ± 0.012/0.917 ± 0.059	3.64
Ryu et al.24	U-Net	0.084/0.648	0.078/0.742	0.036 ± 0.022/0.890 ± 0.088	4.50
Elmalem et al.40	U-Net	0.088/0.630	0.070/0.735	0.033 ± 0.021/0.889 ± 0.098	4.50
Milgrom et al.18	U-Net	0.073/0.660	0.050/0.801	0.027 ± 0.018/0.903 ± 0.088	5.58
Fontbonne et al.30	U-Net	0.062/0.691	0.038/0.852	0.021 ± 0.014/0.920 ± 0.077	7.83
Ren et al.58	U-Net	0.052/0.730	0.022/0.910	0.015 ± 0.009/0.920 ± 0.073	8.63
Ben-Eliezer et al.15	U-Net	0.071/0.656	0.048/0.795	0.023 ± 0.018/0.916 ± 0.080	9.14
Dowski et al.7	U-Net	0.068/0.672	0.046/0.831	0.028 ± 0.015/0.904 ± 0.070	13.32
E2E-BPF	U-Net	0.051/0.743	0.022/0.912	0.015 ± 0.006/0.942 ± 0.020	16.74