## 3 Results
### Inter-Target Discrimination and Resolution  
For all target pairs tested, the MO\({}^{2}\)CA system was able to identify and discriminate between targets. Target pair discrimination was affected by both the size of the targets and the distance separating the two targets. Specifically, for all conditions tested, inter-target discrimination was best for larger targets, and under conditions of greater individual target separation within a target pair. Inter-target discrimination for each target size and each-inter target distance tested are described here, detailed in Table 1, and presented in Figure 8.  
Figure 8: (**a**) 2 \(\times\) 2 mm inter-target discrimination resolution. (**b**) 5 \(\times\) 5 mm inter-target discrimination resolution. (**c**) 10 \(\times\) 10 mm inter-target discrimination resolution. (**d**) Maximum distance for target identification relative to target size. (**e**) Maximum distance for target identification relative to target separation distance.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
\begin{tabular}{c} **Distance of** \\ **Separation (mm)** \\ \end{tabular} & **2 mm Targets** & **5 mm Targets** & **10 mm Targets** & **\(p\)-Value** \\ \hline
2 & 2.5 ft & 2.67 ft & 4 ft & 0.003 \\ \hline
5 & 4.67 ft & 5.33 ft & 9 ft & \textless{}0.001 \\ \hline
10 & 5.17 ft & 7.67 ft & 11 ft & \textless{}0.001 \\ \hline \(p\)-value & 0.001 & \textless{}0.001 & \textless{}0.001 & \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Analysis of Inter-Target Resolution by ANOVA.  
Figure 7: (**a**) Comparison of target capture and target resolution based on size. (**b**) Bar graph depicting maximum distance for target identification based on size.  
For 2 mm target pairs: inter-target resolution increased from 2.5 ft when placed 2 mm apart, to 4.7 ft for 5 mm apart, and to 5.2 ft for a placement of 10 mm apart (Figure 8a; Supplementary Figure S2). Analysis by single factor ANOVA indicated that there was a significant increase in the ability of the MO\({}^{2}\)CA to identify the 2 mm target pair as they were placed further apart (F (2,6) = 27.13, \(p\) = 0.001). Post-hoc testing via Bonferroni indicated significant differences between the 2 mm separation to both the 5 mm and 10 mm separation. However, no significant difference was observed between the 5 mm and 10 mm separation.  
For 5 mm target pairs: inter-target resolution increased significantly (F (2,6) = 56.33, \(p\) < 0.001) from 2.7 ft when placed 2 mm apart, to 5.3 ft for 5 mm apart, to 7.7 ft for placement 10 mm apart (Figure 8b; Supplementary Figure S2). Post-hoc testing via the Bonferroni method indicated a significant difference in resolution between each group.  
For 10 mm target pairs: inter-target resolution increased significantly (F (2,6) = 325, \(p\) < 0.001) from 4 ft when placed 2 mm apart, to 9 ft for 5 mm apart, to 10.7 ft for placement 10 mm apart (Figure 8c; Supplementary Figure S2). Post-hoc testing via the Bonferroni method indicated a significant difference in resolution between each group.  
Each target size had a linear correlation as the distance of separation increased (2 mm target: \(r^{2}\) = 0.86, \(p\) = 0.34, 5 mm target: \(r^{2}\) = 0.98, \(p\) = 0.16, 10 mm target: \(r^{2}\) = 0.91, \(p\) = 0.27). Furthermore, statistical analysis by single factor ANOVA indicated a significant difference between groups when the different target sizes were compared to each other with the same distance of separation: 2 mm of separation (F (2,6) = 18.25, \(p\) = 0.0028), 5 mm of separation (F (2,6) = 73.5, \(p\) < 0.001), and 10 mm of separation (F (2,6) = 68.25, \(p\) < 0.001). Post-hoc testing via the Bonferroni method indicated that the 10 mm target was significantly different from both the 5 mm and 2 mm targets at all distances of separation, while the 2 mm targets and 5 mm targets were only significantly different from each other at 10 mm of separation.