docs: add surface calibration example to the docs

changelog.md

@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@
 * Added parameter `titles` to customize title of each subplot in [`Kymo.plot_with_channels()`](https://lumicks-pylake.readthedocs.io/en/latest/_api/lumicks.pylake.kymo.Kymo.html#lumicks.pylake.kymo.Kymo.plot_with_channels).
 * Added [`KymoTrack.sample_from_channel()`](https://lumicks-pylake.readthedocs.io/en/latest/_api/lumicks.pylake.kymotracker.kymotrack.KymoTrack.html#lumicks.pylake.kymotracker.kymotrack.KymoTrack.sample_from_channel) to downsample channel data to the time points of a kymotrack.
 * Added support for file names with spaces in [`lk.download_from_doi()`](https://lumicks-pylake.readthedocs.io/en/latest/_api/lumicks.pylake.download_from_doi.html#lumicks.pylake.download_from_doi).
-* Added [`lk.touchdown()`](https://lumicks-pylake.readthedocs.io/en/latest/_api/lumicks.pylake.touchdown.html#lumicks.pylake.touchdown) to find the height above the surface using the axial force signal.
+* Added [`lk.touchdown()`](https://lumicks-pylake.readthedocs.io/en/latest/_api/lumicks.pylake.touchdown.html#lumicks.pylake.touchdown) to find the height above the surface using the axial force signal and added an example notebook demonstrating surface calibration.
 
 ## v1.5.2 | 2024-07-24
 

docs/api.rst

@@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ Force calibration
     ActiveCalibrationModel
     force_calibration.power_spectrum.PowerSpectrum
     force_calibration.power_spectrum_calibration.CalibrationResults
+    force_calibration.touchdown.TouchdownResult
 
     :template: function.rst
 
@@ -49,6 +50,7 @@ Force calibration
     fit_power_spectrum
     viscosity_of_water
     density_of_water
+    touchdown
     coupling_correction_2d
 
 
@@ -157,4 +159,4 @@ Simulation
     :toctree: _api
     :template: function.rst
 
-    simulation.simulate_diffusive_tracks
+    simulation.simulate_diffusive_tracks

docs/examples/index.rst

@@ -22,4 +22,5 @@ For all of the examples, it is assumed that the following lines precede any othe
     cas9_kymotracking/cas9_kymotracking
     hairpin_fitting/hairpin_unfolding
     droplet_fusion/droplet_fusion
+    surface_calibration/surface_calibration.rst
     bead_coupling/coupling

docs/examples/surface_calibration/surface_calibration.rst

@@ -0,0 +1,288 @@
+Near surface calibration
+========================
+
+.. only:: html
+
+    :nbexport:`Download this page as a Jupyter notebook <self>`
+
+In this notebook, we will look at calibration data acquired at different distances from the surface.
+This data will be used to assess the effect the nearby surface has on the estimated calibration factors.
+We will be using both passive and active calibration and compare the obtained results.
+First we download the data::
+
+    lk.download_from_doi(r"10.5281/zenodo.13880274", "surface_calibration")
+
+We will use the `glob <https://docs.python.org/3/library/glob.html#glob.glob>`_ module to collect
+file names according to a pattern conveniently.
+During acquisition, we have stored the height in the file name to make it easier to identify the data.
+We can extract this height from the filename using the regular expression module `re <https://docs.python.org/3/library/re.html>`_.
+Let's import both these modules now::
+
+    import re
+    import glob
+
+To get a list of files, we use glob::
+
+    filenames = glob.glob(r"surface_calibration/*Marker*.h5")
+
+The experimental condition for each calibration is stored in its filename.
+We write two small helper files, that allow us to extract these experimental conditions conveniently::
+
+    def height(filename):
+        """Grabs the approximate height from the filename"""
+
+        # Searches for a string of the format value.value, where the decimal point part is optional
+        return float(re.search(r"\d+[.]\d+", filename)[0])
+
+    def osc_axis(filename):
+        """Grabs the oscillation axis from the filename"""
+
+        # Searches for nanostage_X or nanostage_Y and extracts the axis by grabbing the last.
+        # character of a match. If no match is found, then it must be a passive calibration.
+        matches = re.search(r"nanostage_([XY])", filename)
+        return matches[0][-1] if matches else "passive"
+
+To be able to compare passive and active calibration, we need to have a reasonable estimate of the height above the flow cell surface.
+To approximately determine this height, we approach the surface until the axial force steeply rises.
+At that point, we know that we have hit the surface with the bead.
+We then calculate the surface position based on the inflection point of a piecewise linear fit.
+With the surface position at hand, we can use the stage position to then calculate the height above the cover-slip surface.
+
+There is one more issue to consider however.
+When moving the nanostage, one might assume that moving the nanostage up by `1` micron, would result
+in a trap height that is `1` micron less than before.
+This is not the case however.
+
+The trap height is determined by the position of the stage, but also by the focal shift that occurs
+when focusing through interfaces with mismatched indices of refraction (such as water and glass).
+This focal shift introduces a scaling factor between the vertical motion of the stage surface and
+the axial position of the trap within the flowcell.
+
+For paraxial rays, this focal shift can be computed from Snell’s law, but it is not straightforward
+to compute when high NA objectives are used :cite:`neuman2004optical`.
+
+There is a way to measure this shift for surface experiments.
+When trapping near the surface, the light reflected between the bead and the cover-glass gives rise
+to an interference pattern.
+In other words, there is a spatial modulation of the intensity as a function of the axial position of the bead.
+This is depicted schematically below (note that none of the depicted elements or angles are to scale).
+
+.. image:: interference.png
+  :nbattach:
+
+The spatial frequency of this intensity modulation is given by :cite:`neuman2004optical,neuman2005measurement`:
+
+.. math::
+
+    f_{spatial} = \frac{2 n_{medium}}{\lambda}
+
+Where :math:`f_{spatial}` is the spatial intensity modulation we would obtain in the absence
+of focal shift, :math:`\lambda` the laser wavelength and :math:`n_{medium}` the index of
+refraction of the medium.
+
+To find the focal shift, we measure the interference pattern on the light intensity by moving the
+stage axially and measuring the axial force.
+We then fit a sine-wave with an exponential decay term added to a polynomial background to this data:
+
+.. math::
+
+    I(z) = P_{background}(z) + \exp{\left(- k z\right)} \sin\left(2 \pi f_{observed} z\right)
+
+Here :math:`I(z)` refers to the light intensity with :math:`z` the axial position,
+:math:`P_{background}(z)` to the average light intensity as a function of axial position,
+:math:`k` the decay constant and `f_{observed}` the observed frequency of the intensity modulation.
+The effective focal shift is given by :math:`f_{observed} / f_{spatial}`.
+Note that this relation is only valid over a small range, as further away, the change in axial
+stiffness may also move the bead relative to the trap focus.
+
+To perform this analysis in Pylake, we can use the function :func:`~lumicks.pylake.touchdown()`.
+Let's load a file and perform the analysis::
+
+    f = lk.File("surface_calibration/20220203-165705_Touchdown_T1_Fz.h5")
+    td = lk.touchdown(
+        f["Nanostage position"]["Z"].data[:len(f.force1z.data)],
+        f.force1z.data,
+        int(f.force1z.sample_rate)
+    )
+
+We can plot the result to inspect the quality of the fit and the point identified as the point where the bead touches the surface::
+
+    td.plot()
+
+.. image:: touchdown.png
+
+This fit looks reasonable, but we have to remember that these quantities are approximations.
+The focal shift in reality is not a constant and the intersection point between the two linear
+regressions of the axial force a crude approximation.
+
+To obtain the distance of the bead above the cover-slip, we can use the determined focal shift
+and the stage position at which the bead and the surface touched.
+The relationship between these two is given by:
+
+.. math::
+
+    d / 2 - \alpha_{shift} \left(z_{nanostage} - z_{surface}\right)
+
+Here :math:`d` is the bead diameter, :math:`\alpha_{shift}` is the focal shift factor,
+:math:`z_{nanostage}` is the nanostage position and :math:`z_{surface}` is the nanostage position
+at which the bead and flowcell touch (surface-to-surface).
+
+To obtain `z_surface` and the focal shift we can use the properties
+:attr:`~lumicks.pylake.Touchdown.surface_position` and
+:attr:`~lumicks.pylake.Touchdown.focal_shift`.
+Let's see what value we got for the focal shift.
+
+    >>> td.focal_shift
+    0.9131828139774159
+
+These measurements were done with a water objective.
+The value we obtain is close to `1`, which is what we would expect for a water objective.
+Generally, for a water immersion objective, we'd expect values between `0.9` and `1.05`, whereas
+a TIRF or oil objective would have focal shift values between `0.75` and `0.85`.
+
+In this case, we do not need to use those values directly as a function to calculate
+the height above the surface that we require for calibration directly is also available
+as :meth:`~lumicks.pylake.calculate_height()`.
+
+Given that we now have a way to calculate the height, let's create a small function to perform
+the active and passive calibrations.
+This helps keep the rest of our code short (rather than repeating the same parameters many times).
+The function will take the force signal, a fit range (since we should use a different fit range
+for axial force, `z`, than lateral force), the height above the surface,
+and the nanostage data (for active calibrations)::
+
+    # These variables will be picked up by the function as well.
+    bead_diameter = 1.36
+
+    # Note that we oscillated at 38 Hz, most C-Traps will oscillate at 17 Hz
+    oscillation_frequency = 38
+
+    def calibrate(force_signal, fit_range, nano=None, height=None):
+        # Decalibrate the data back to volts by dividing by the old force response
+        voltage = force_signal / force_signal.calibration[0]["Response (pN/V)"]
+
+        calibration = lk.calibrate_force(
+            voltage.data,
+            driving_data=nano.data if nano else None,
+            bead_diameter=bead_diameter,
+            temperature=25,
+            sample_rate=voltage.sample_rate,
+            active_calibration=True if nano else False,
+            driving_frequency_guess=oscillation_frequency,
+            num_points_per_block=250,
+            distance_to_surface=height,
+            hydrodynamically_correct=False,  # We are too close to the surface to use hydro
+            fit_range=fit_range,
+        )
+
+        return calibration
+
+Let's define a function to do all the calibrations corresponding to a list of files.
+To make comparisons on the effect of including the height determination in the calibration clear,
+we add a parameter that defines whether we should be using the height information or not.
+That way, we can see the effect of this on both passive and active calibration::
+
+    def calibrate_files(filenames, use_height):
+        calibrations = {}
+
+        for filename in filenames:
+            # Load the file and extract our channels of interest
+            fh = lk.File(filename)
+            f1x = fh.force1x
+            f1y = fh.force1y
+            f1z = fh.force1z
+            n1x = fh["Nanostage position"]["X"]
+            n1y = fh["Nanostage position"]["Y"]
+
+            # We store our data by the height estimate present in the file name.
+            # Have we encountered this height before? If not, add it to the dictionary!
+            key = height(filename)
+            if key not in calibrations:
+                calibrations[key] = {}
+
+            # We grab the oscillation axis from the file name (this will return "X", "Y" or "passive").
+            oscillation_axis = osc_axis(filename)
+
+            # We will store the average nanostage z-position for later use
+            z_position = np.mean(fh["Nanostage position"]["Z"].data)
+            calibrations[key]["Z"] = z_position
+
+            # We calculate the height based on the touchdown data. We use this for the calibration.
+            if use_height:
+                current_height = td.calculate_height(z_position, bead_diameter)
+            else:
+                current_height = None
+
+            calibrations[key]["current_height"] = current_height
+
+            if oscillation_axis == "X":
+                calibrations[key]["ac_x"] = calibrate(f1x, [100, 17000], n1x, height=current_height)
+            elif oscillation_axis == "Y":
+                calibrations[key]["ac_y"] = calibrate(f1y, [100, 17000], n1y, height=current_height)
+            else:
+                calibrations[key]["pc_x"] = calibrate(f1x, [100, 17000], height=current_height)
+                calibrations[key]["pc_y"] = calibrate(f1y, [100, 17000], height=current_height)
+
+                # Note that axial force needs a more limited fitting range!
+                calibrations[key]["pc_z"] = calibrate(f1z, [60, 6000], height=current_height)
+
+        return calibrations
+
+We can now perform the calibrations.
+First we do them while taking into account the (approximate) height above the surface::
+
+    calibrations = calibrate_files(filenames, True)
+
+Now it's time to see what we got::
+
+    # Let's grab all the heights and sort them
+    heights = np.sort(list(calibrations.keys()))
+
+We will plot the resulting stiffness values obtained using the various calibration methods::
+
+    plt.plot(heights, [calibrations[h]["ac_x"].stiffness for h in heights])
+    plt.plot(heights, [calibrations[h]["ac_y"].stiffness for h in heights])
+
+    plt.plot(heights, [calibrations[h]["pc_x"].stiffness for h in heights], 'C0--')
+    plt.plot(heights, [calibrations[h]["pc_y"].stiffness for h in heights], 'C1--')
+    plt.plot(heights, [calibrations[h]["pc_z"].stiffness for h in heights], 'C2--')
+    plt.xlabel('Height [um]')
+    plt.ylabel('Stiffness [pN/nm]')
+
+As we can see, the difference between passive and active calibration is not so large.
+The stiffness is almost constant for all methods as we approach the surface.
+
+.. image:: ac_pc_with_height.png
+
+What would have happened if we did not know the height above the surface?
+Let's rerun the calibrations without the height information to check::
+
+    calibrations_no_height = calibrate_files(filenames, False)
+
+And plotting the stiffness again::
+
+    plt.plot(heights, [calibrations_no_height[h]["ac_x"].stiffness for h in heights])
+    plt.plot(heights, [calibrations_no_height[h]["ac_y"].stiffness for h in heights])
+
+    plt.plot(heights, [calibrations_no_height[h]["pc_x"].stiffness for h in heights], 'C0--')
+    plt.plot(heights, [calibrations_no_height[h]["pc_y"].stiffness for h in heights], 'C1--')
+    plt.plot(heights, [calibrations_no_height[h]["pc_z"].stiffness for h in heights], 'C2--')
+    plt.xlabel('Height [um]')
+    plt.ylabel('Stiffness [pN/nm]')
+
+.. image:: ac_pc_no_height.png
+
+We see that the results are quite dramatically different now.
+The stiffness values for passive are much lower, and the passive calibration is as constant as before.
+To see why this is the case, let's have a look at the drag coefficient inferred from the active calibration procedure::
+
+    plt.plot(heights, [calibrations_no_height[h]["ac_x"].measured_drag_coefficient for h in heights])
+    height_above_surf = np.asarray([calibrations[h]["current_height"] for h in heights])
+    plt.ylabel("Drag coefficient [kg/s]")
+    plt.xlabel("Height [um]")
+
+.. image:: ac_drag.png
+
+What we can see is that the drag coefficient changes steeply as a function of distance to the surface.
+Not taking into account the height above the surface results in an incorrectly assuming drag
+coefficient for passive calibration, resulting in a very different value for the trap stiffness.

docs/refs.bib

@@ -32,6 +32,28 @@ @article{Kaczmarczyk2022
   doi = {10.1038/s41467-022-33503-6}
 }
 
+@article{neuman2004optical,
+  title={Optical trapping},
+  author={Neuman, Keir C and Block, Steven M},
+  journal={Review of scientific instruments},
+  volume={75},
+  number={9},
+  pages={2787--2809},
+  year={2004},
+  publisher={American Institute of Physics}
+}
+
+@article{neuman2005measurement,
+  title={Measurement of the effective focal shift in an optical trap},
+  author={Neuman, Keir C and Abbondanzieri, Elio A and Block, Steven M},
+  journal={Optics letters},
+  volume={30},
+  number={11},
+  pages={1318--1320},
+  year={2005},
+  publisher={Optica Publishing Group}
+}
+
 @article{Kochaniak2009,
   author = {Kochaniak, A B and Habuchi, S and Loparo, J J and Chang D J and Cimprich K A and Walter J C and van Oijen A M},
   title = {Proliferating Cell Nuclear Antigen Uses Two Distinct Modes to Move along DNA},