Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 43 references

Controlling the Photoelectric Effect in the Time Domain

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Pith's one-line read Helium photoionized by two or three attosecond pulses in a weak infrared field emits electrons whose energy can be shifted continuously and whose emission direction becomes asymmetric, contradicting standard photoelectric predictions.

desk verdict Solid experimental demonstration of CEP-controlled photoelectron steering with a few attosecond pulses, but the analytic model overreaches because the slow-phase approximation fails at the stated IR intensity. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.09508 v2 pith:2R74AUGC submitted 2019-08-26 physics.atom-ph

classification physics.atom-ph PACS 32.80.Fb32.80.Qk42.65.Ky
keywords attosecondpulsesphotoelectriceffectcarrier-envelopephasephotoelectronmomentumdistributionsidebandsinfrareddressingfieldelectronwave-packetinterferencetime-domaincoherentcontrol
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper reports that the textbook rules of the photoelectric effect—electrons emitted with discrete energy $h\nu - I_p$ and a symmetric angular distribution—can be suspended in helium when the ionizing light is a tailored sequence of two or three attosecond pulses accompanied by a weak infrared field. With two pulses separated by half an infrared period, the photoelectron energy shifts continuously, in opposite directions for the two emission directions, by an amount set by the infrared field and the carrier-envelope phase. With three pulses, the discrete harmonic peaks reappear but sidebands appear almost exclusively in one direction. The authors interpret both effects as interference of a few electron wave packets whose relative phases are imprinted by the infrared field, and they argue that the energy quantum of the infrared photon only becomes apparent when the light-matter interaction lasts at least one optical cycle. If correct, the work turns the photoelectric effect into a target for time-domain coherent control.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the interfering set of electron wave packets (EWPs) created by the attosecond pulses, treated as temporal slits separated by half the infrared period. The infrared field enters as a phase modulation on each EWP, $\Phi_{\mathrm{IR}}(\mathbf{p},t)\approx -(e/m_e\hbar)\int_t^\infty \mathbf{p}\cdot\mathbf{A}(t')\,dt'$, which for pulses centered at $m\pi/\omega$ becomes $-(-1)^m \eta_p$ with $\eta_p = e\,\mathbf{p}\cdot\mathbf{A}_0\sin(\omega\tau)/(m_e\hbar\omega)$, where $\tau$ is the XUV-IR delay and $\Omega = I_p/\hbar + p^2/(2m_e\hbar)$ is the XUV frequency. The two-pulse interference formula $\sin^2[\pi\Omega/(2\omega)+\eta_p]$ produces energy shifts, while the three-pulse formula, involving the spectral phase difference $s(\Omega)$ between central and side pulses, produces direction-dependent sideband enhancement. The key approximation is that the infrared phase does not vary appreciably over the duration of each attosecond pulse.

What would settle it

Record the two-pulse photoelectron energy shift while scanning the XUV-IR delay $\tau$: the model predicts a shift proportional to $\sin(\omega\tau)$, with the up and down emission directions shifting oppositely; a measurement that deviates from this dependence, or that shows sidebands and directional asymmetry with a single attosecond pulse under the same weak field, would rule out the phase-modulation interference picture.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that a weak infrared dressing field, acting during less than one optical cycle, changes the photoelectron spectrum from quantized peaks to continuously shifted peaks, or to direction-dependent sidebands, depending on how many attosecond pulses ionize the atom. For two pulses the probability is proportional to $\sin^2[\pi\Omega/(2\omega)+\eta_p]$, so the odd-harmonic peaks move by $2\eta_p\omega/\pi$, with $\eta_p$ proportional to $\mathbf{p}\cdot\mathbf{A}_0$; the shift therefore grows with electron momentum and reverses sign with emission direction. For three pulses the probability contains a term $\cos[s(\Omega)+2\eta_p]$ that enhances sidebands in one direction and suppresses them in the other. The same physics is presented as a two- or three-slit interference problem in time, where the infrared field adds a momentum-dependent phase to one or more electron wave packets. The experiment measures these effects in helium with a three-dimensional momentum spectrometer and reproduces them with strong-field-approximation simulations, including the carrier-envelope-phase dependence.

Load-bearing premise

The argument treats the weak infrared field as a pure, slowly varying phase shift on each attosecond pulse, with the vector potential $\mathbf{A}(t)=\mathbf{A}_0\cos[\omega(t-\tau)]$ and a fitted delay near $0.6$ optical cycles; if the field is not weak enough, or varies significantly within a pulse, the simple two- or three-slit interference picture and the extracted energy shifts would need revision.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The carrier-envelope phase becomes a control knob for photoelectron energy and direction: changing it between $0$, $\pi/2$, $\pi$, and $3\pi/2$ reverses or removes the asymmetry in a predictable way.
  • Energy quantization is not intrinsic to IR-assisted XUV photoionization; it emerges only when the light-matter interaction lasts at least one full optical cycle, as in the three-pulse case.
  • Tailored few-pulse XUV sequences plus a synchronized weak infrared field constitute a time-domain coherent-control scheme that can be applied to one of the fastest processes in nature.
  • The spectral phase (chirp) between consecutive attosecond pulses is observable through the up-down sideband asymmetry, providing a way to characterize attosecond pulse trains.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The two- and three-pulse results can be read as a proof of principle for programmable photoelectron spectral shaping: choosing the number, amplitudes, and relative phases of attosecond pulses could engineer the energy-angle interference pattern beyond the two cases shown here.
  • The same phase-modulation mechanism should apply to other small quantum systems; if a molecule or solid shows the same carrier-envelope-phase-dependent directional asymmetry, time-domain control of photoemission could be extended to more complex samples.
  • A natural next experiment is to scan the XUV-IR delay $\tau$ continuously and check that the two-pulse energy shift follows $\sin(\omega\tau)$ while the sideband asymmetry follows the same phase; this would test whether the extracted $\eta_p$ is really the infrared-imposed momentum-dependent phase.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports an experiment in which helium is photoionized by a tailored sequence of two or three attosecond XUV pulses in the presence of a weak infrared dressing field, with full 3D momentum detection. For two pulses separated by about half the IR period, the photoelectron peaks are continuously shifted in energy, with opposite shifts in the two emission directions along the polarization axis. For three pulses, sidebands appear predominantly in one direction and are suppressed in the other. The authors interpret these observations as interference of two or three electron wave packets that acquire an IR-induced, momentum-dependent phase, summarized by the analytical formulas in Eqs. (1) and (2), and they support the interpretation with strong-field-approximation (SFA) simulations that integrate Eq. (4). The central conceptual claim is that time-domain confinement of the light-matter interaction to less than one optical cycle enables continuous, direction-dependent control of photoelectron energy, in contrast to the usual quantized, parity-conserving picture of the photoelectric effect.

Significance. If the claims are quantitatively established, this is a valuable contribution to attosecond science: it demonstrates coherent control of the photoelectric effect with a few attosecond pulses and a weak IR field, and it provides a simple wave-packet-interference picture that connects continuous streaking-like energy shifts with discrete sideband formation. The experimental setup is sophisticated, with CEP-stable few-cycle driving, harmonic generation, and 3D electron-ion coincidence detection, and the SFA simulations agree with the measured angular-resolved spectra in both the two-pulse and three-pulse configurations. The analytical two- and three-slit picture is attractive and provides falsifiable predictions about the p·A0 scaling of the shift and the direction-dependent sideband asymmetry. However, the analytical derivation rests on the slow-phase approximation of Eq. (5), which is shown in the report to be violated at the stated experimental parameters, and the quantitative comparison uses a fitted temporal offset and simulation field parameters. The work is therefore significant and plausible but requires revision before the quantitative explanation can be accepted.

major comments (2)
  1. [Methods, Analytical derivation, Eq. (5)] The assumption that the IR phase does not vary much over the attosecond pulse duration is quantitatively violated at the stated experimental conditions. With I_IR=6×10^11 W/cm^2, λ=820 nm, τ≈0.6 cycles, and a photoelectron energy of about 20 eV (p≈2.4×10^-24 kg·m/s), the estimated phase slope dΦIR/dt at the pulse center is of order 3×10^15 rad/s, giving a phase change of roughly 1 rad over a 300-as pulse. This is not negligible and is comparable to the interference phase itself, so Eq. (5) is not a controlled approximation under the parameters claimed in the paper. Consequently Eqs. (1) and (2) do not follow quantitatively from the stated assumptions; the linear phase ramp across each wave packet would shift its spectral envelope by several eV before the interference is evaluated. The SFA simulation, which integrates Eq. (4) rather than using Eq. (5), may still reproduce the data, but the analytical model presented as the explanatory core of the paper needs either a finite-pulse-width treatment or an explicit statement that Eqs. (1)-(2) are heuristic and not a derivation from the stated assumptions.
  2. [Methods, Simulations] The agreement between experiment and simulation is obtained with a temporal offset τ≈0.6 optical cycles between the attosecond pulses and the IR dressing field, and with the IR and XUV field parameters chosen in the simulation. Since τ is not independently measured in the experiment (e.g., by an in-situ streaking calibration), the comparison does not constitute a parameter-free test of the central prediction. The extracted value of τ directly enters the phase ηp in Eqs. (1) and (2), so the reported shift and sideband asymmetry are conditioned on this fitted parameter. The authors should either provide an independent determination of τ (for example from the same 3D momentum data using a known streaking feature) or demonstrate that the qualitative and quantitative conclusions are robust over the plausible uncertainty range of τ and of the amplitude ratio r and spectral phase s(Ω) used in the three-pulse analysis.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Introduction] The abstract's phrase 'thus contradicting well established quantum-mechanical predictions' is stronger than the introduction's 'apparent contradiction'; the observed effects are fully consistent with quantum mechanics once the coherent IR field is included, so the framing should be softened to avoid implying a breakdown of quantum-mechanical laws.
  2. [Methods, Eq. (4)] The integral in Eq. (4) is written over an infinite time range with A(t) as a pure cosine; for a nonvanishing vector potential the integral is only conditionally convergent, and the derivation would benefit from a statement that the IR pulse envelope is assumed finite and slowly varying, or from a regularization prescription.
  3. [Fig. 3 caption and panels] The color plots in Fig. 3 would be easier to evaluate quantitatively if the color scale (and ideally its normalization) were given in the caption, and if the peak positions quoted in the text were marked with symbols or vertical lines in the two-pulse case.
  4. [General presentation] There are several typographical errors, including 'loosing data' (should be 'losing data') in the Methods section and 'bewteen' (should be 'between') in the Fig. 4 caption; these should be corrected in a revision.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: multi-slit interference formulas follow algebraically from stated SFA phase-modulation assumptions; the fitted IR delay does not by construction produce the predicted observables.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The paper starts from the SFA amplitude (Eq. 3), approximates the weak IR action as a phase modulation (Eq. 4), evaluates that phase at the attosecond pulse centers under an explicitly stated slow-phase assumption (Eq. 5), and obtains the two- and three-EWP interference formulas (Eqs. 1, 2, and 6). These are algebraic consequences of the stated model, not redefinitions of the experimental output: the phase eta_p is computed from the IR vector potential and electron momentum, while the predicted observables are the energy-dependent shift and up/down asymmetry of the interference pattern. The temporal offset tau ~ 0.6 cycles is adjusted for agreement, but it is a single global parameter controlling the overall magnitude/sign of the IR-induced phase; it does not by itself encode the energy dependence, the direction asymmetry, or the sideband enhancement, which follow from the interference structure. The paper therefore does not fit the predicted quantity and call it a prediction. Self-citations ([34], [37], [42], [43]) are used for source characterization, standard SFA theory, and spectrometer design; they are not invoked as a uniqueness theorem or as the sole justification of the central physical claim. The concern raised by the skeptic about the slow-phase approximation being quantitatively marginal at 6e11 W/cm^2 is a question of the model's accuracy/validity, not circularity: even if Eq. (5) required correction, that would alter the numerical predictions without making the derivation depend on its conclusion. No circular step can be exhibited from the text.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central interpretation rests on standard SFA and weak-field phase-modulation assumptions. The only introduced numbers beyond physical constants are the chosen IR field parameters and the fitted delay, none of which are new entities.

free parameters (3)
  • temporal offset tau = ~0.6 optical cycles
    Delay between the attosecond pulses and the IR dressing field; chosen to achieve agreement between experiment and simulation (Methods, Simulations).
  • IR vector potential amplitude A0 = corresponding to 6e11 W/cm2 in simulation
    IR field amplitude in the simulation, chosen to reproduce experimental conditions; enters eta_p = e p A0 / (m_e hbar omega) and controls the magnitude of the shift and sidebands.
  • amplitude ratio r and spectral phase difference s(Omega) = not given as specific numbers
    Parameters of the few-pulse train in Eq. (2); derived from the assumed pulse sequence and not independently measured, but they affect the sideband intensities.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The IR field effect on the photoelectron can be reduced to a pure phase modulation (Eq. 4), with the phase varying slowly over the attosecond pulse duration.
    Invoked in Methods, Analytical derivation, before Eq. (5); underlies the whole two- or three-slit interference interpretation.
  • domain assumption The dipole moment d(p) for helium can be calculated with a hydrogenic approximation.
    Stated in Methods, Simulations; affects overall amplitudes but likely not the interference structure of the spectra.
  • domain assumption The attosecond pulses are separated by half the laser period and have a phase difference of pi between consecutive pulses.
    Used to derive Eqs. (1) and (2) and to interpret the CEP-dependent pulse trains in Fig. 3.
  • domain assumption The XUV field is weak enough that the SFA and the perturbative limit eta_p << 1 apply.
    Used to expand Eq. (6) into a1 and a2; the IR intensity is below 1e12 W/cm2, justifying the weak-field treatment.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Controlling the Photoelectric Effect in the Time Domain." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2R74AUGC

@misc{pith2026190809508,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Controlling the Photoelectric Effect in the Time Domain},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2R74AUGC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.09508}
}
read the original abstract

When an atom or molecule absorbs a high-energy photon, an electron is emitted with a well-defined energy and a highly-symmetric angular distribution, ruled by energy quantization and parity conservation. These rules seemingly break down when small quantum systems are exposed to short and intense light pulses, which raise the question of their universality for the simplest case of the photoelectric effect. Here we investigate the photoionization of helium by a sequence of attosecond pulses in the presence of a weak infrared dressing field. We continuously control the energy and introduce an asymmetry in the emission direction of the photoelectrons, thus contradicting well established quantum-mechanical predictions. This control is possible due to an extreme temporal confinement of the light-matter interaction. Our work extends time-domain coherent control schemes to one of the fastest processes in nature, the photoelectric effect.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.09508 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Principle of the experiment: Helium atoms are exposed to two (a) or three (b) XUV attosecond pulses (blue) in presence of a weak IR laser field (red) at a fixed delay. Electron wave packets (violet) are emitted with an up-down asymmetry relative to the direction of polar￾ization, resulting in different spectra (brown and green) when recording electrons emitted in the two opposite directions. In the case of two pulse… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Experimental setup: (a) 200-kHz 6-fs IR laser pulses with horizontal polarization are sent through a wedge pair for CEP control and focused with an achromatic lens into a high￾pressure argon gas jet. A tailored sequence of few XUV attosecond pulses is then generated and focused by a gold-coated toroidal mirror into a 3D momentum spectrometer, where it intersects an effusive helium jet. An Al filter can be introduced… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. XUV attosecond pulse trains and angular-resolved spectrograms: (a,b) XUV (blue) and IR (red) electric fields. (a) π/2 and (b) 0; (c-f) Color plots representing the pho￾toelectron angular distributions as function of energy. The experimental results are shown in (c,d), while corresponding simulated photoelectron spectra are shown in (e,f). The red dashed lines indicate the photoelectron kinetic energies after absorpt… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Interference through multiple temporal slits: (a) The interference of two EWPs separated by half a laser cycle with a π phase difference [left plot, panel (1)] leads to a modula￾tion in the energy (frequency) domain, with maxima at the energies corresponding to excitat…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Ueber das gesetz der energieverteilung im normalspectrum

    Planck, M. Ueber das gesetz der energieverteilung im normalspectrum. Ann. Phys. 309, 1 (1901)

  2. [2]

    ¨Uber einen die erzeugung und verwandlung des lichtes betreffenden heuris- tischen gesichtspunkt

    Einstein, A. ¨Uber einen die erzeugung und verwandlung des lichtes betreffenden heuris- tischen gesichtspunkt. Ann. Phys. 322, 132–148 (1905)

  3. [3]

    Laporte, O., Meggers, W. F. Some rules of spectral structure. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 11, 459–463 (1925)

  4. [4]

    Yang, C. N. On the angular distribution in nuclear reactions and coincidence measure- ments. Phys. Rev. 74, 764 (1948)

  5. [5]

    Cooper, J., Zare, R. N. Angular Distribution of Photoelectrons. J. Chem. Phys 48, 942 (1968)

  6. [6]

    Maiman, T. H. Stimulated optical radiation in ruby. Nature 187, 493 (1960). 11

  7. [7]

    M., Mills, F

    Rowe, E. M., Mills, F. E. Tantalus. 1. A Dedicated Storage Ring Synchrotron Radiation source. Part. Accel. 4, 211-227 (1973)

  8. [8]

    Handbook of high-resolution spectroscopy

    Quack, M., Merkt, F. Handbook of high-resolution spectroscopy. Wiley-Blackwell (2011)

Show all 43 references
  1. [9]

    Becker, U., Shirley, D. A. VUV and Soft X-ray Photoionization . Springer Science & Business Media (2012)

  2. [10]

    Agostini, P., Fabre, F., Mainfray, G., Petite, G., Rahman, N. K. Free-Free Transitions Following Six-Photon Ionization of Xenon Atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 42, 1127 (1979)

  3. [11]

    H., Bashkansky, M., McIlrath, T

    Bucksbaum, P. H., Bashkansky, M., McIlrath, T. J. Scattering of Electrons by Intense Coherent Light. Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 349 (1987)

  4. [12]

    S., Smith, A

    Yin, Y ., Chen, C., Elliott, D. S., Smith, A. V . Asymmetric Photoelectron Angular Distri- butions from Interfering Photoionization Processes. Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2353 (1992)

  5. [13]

    Attosecond control of orbital parity mix interferences and the relative phase of even and odd harmonics in an attosecond pulse train.Phys

    Laurent, G., et al. Attosecond control of orbital parity mix interferences and the relative phase of even and odd harmonics in an attosecond pulse train.Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 083001 (2012)

  6. [14]

    G., et al

    Paulus, G. G., et al. Absolute-phase phenomena in photoionization with few-cycle laser pulses. Nature 414, 182 (2001)

  7. [15]

    G., et al

    Paulus, G. G., et al. Measurement of the phase of few-cycle laser pulses. Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 253004 (2003)

  8. [16]

    Studies of multiphoton production of vacuum-ultraviolet radiation in the rare gases

    McPherson, A., et al. Studies of multiphoton production of vacuum-ultraviolet radiation in the rare gases. J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 4, 595 (1987). 12

  9. [17]

    Multiple-harmonic conversion of 1064 nm radiation in rare gases

    Ferray, M., et al. Multiple-harmonic conversion of 1064 nm radiation in rare gases. J. Phys. B 21, L31 (1988)

  10. [18]

    Delay in photoemission

    Schultze, M., et al. Delay in photoemission. Science 328, 1658-1662 (2010)

  11. [19]

    Probing single-photon ionization on the attosecond time scale

    Kl ¨under, K., et al. Probing single-photon ionization on the attosecond time scale. Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 143002 (2011)

  12. [20]

    Attosecond correlation dynamics

    Ossiander, M., et al. Attosecond correlation dynamics. Nature Physics 13, 280 - 285 (2017)

  13. [21]

    Photoionization in the time and frequency domain

    Isinger, M., et al. Photoionization in the time and frequency domain. Science 358, 893– 896 (2017)

  14. [22]

    Huppert, M., Jordan, I., Baykusheva, D., Conta, A., W ¨orner, H. J. Attosecond delays in molecular photoionization. Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 093001 (2016)

  15. [23]

    Attosecond coupled electron and nuclear dynamics in dissociative ionization of h-2

    Cattaneo, L., et al. Attosecond coupled electron and nuclear dynamics in dissociative ionization of h-2. (2018)

  16. [24]

    Orientation-dependent stereo wigner time delay and electron localization in a small molecule

    V os, J., et al. Orientation-dependent stereo wigner time delay and electron localization in a small molecule. Science 360, 1326 - 1330 (2018)

  17. [25]

    L., et al

    Cavalieri, A. L., et al. Attosecond spectroscopy in condensed matter. Nature 449, 1029 (2007)

  18. [26]

    Attosecond dynamical franz-keldysh effect in polycrystalline dia- mond

    Lucchini, M., et al. Attosecond dynamical franz-keldysh effect in polycrystalline dia- mond. Science 353, 916–919 (2016)

  19. [27]

    Steering Attosecond Electron Wave Packets with Light

    Kienberger, R., et al. Steering Attosecond Electron Wave Packets with Light. Science 297, 1144 (2002). 13

  20. [28]

    Attosecond chronoscopy of photoemission

    Pazourek, R., Nagele, S., Burgd ¨orfer, J. Attosecond chronoscopy of photoemission. Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 765–802 (2015)

  21. [29]

    Phase dependence of (N+1) - color (N>1) ir-uv pho- toionization of atoms with higher harmonics

    V ´eniard, V ., Ta¨ıeb, R., Maquet, A. Phase dependence of (N+1) - color (N>1) ir-uv pho- toionization of atoms with higher harmonics. Phys. Rev. A 54, 721 (1996)

  22. [30]

    Observation of a train of attosecond pulses from high harmonic generation

    Paul, P., et al. Observation of a train of attosecond pulses from high harmonic generation. Science 292, 1689 (2001)

  23. [31]

    Reconstruction of attosecond harmonic beating by interference of two-photon transitions

    Muller, H. Reconstruction of attosecond harmonic beating by interference of two-photon transitions. Appl. Phys. B 74, 17 (2002)

  24. [32]

    Attosecond coherent control of single and double photoionization in argon

    Hogle, C., et al. Attosecond coherent control of single and double photoionization in argon. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 173004 (2015)

  25. [33]

    Angular dependence of photoemission time delay in helium

    Heuser, S., et al. Angular dependence of photoemission time delay in helium. Phys. Rev. A 94, 063409 (2016)

  26. [34]

    Phase control of attosecond pulses in a train

    Guo, C., et al. Phase control of attosecond pulses in a train. J. Phys. B 51, 034006 (2018)

  27. [35]

    Cold Target Recoil Ion Momentum Spectroscopy: a ’momentum micro- scope’ to view atomic collision dynamics

    Dorner, R., et al. Cold Target Recoil Ion Momentum Spectroscopy: a ’momentum micro- scope’ to view atomic collision dynamics. Physics Reports 330, 95-192 (2000)

  28. [36]

    Recoil-ion and electron momentum spectroscopy: reaction-microscopes

    Ullrich, J., et al. Recoil-ion and electron momentum spectroscopy: reaction-microscopes. Reports on Progress in Physics 66, 1463-1545 (2003)

  29. [37]

    Theory of high-order harmonic generation by low-frequency laser fields

    Lewenstein, M., Balcou, P., Ivanov, M., L’Huillier, A., Corkum, P. Theory of high-order harmonic generation by low-frequency laser fields. Phys. Rev. A 49, 2117 (1994)

  30. [38]

    Temporal characterization of attosecond XUV fields.J

    Qu ´er´e, F., Mairesse, Y ., Itatani, J. Temporal characterization of attosecond XUV fields.J. Mod. Opt. 52, 339 (2005). 14

  31. [39]

    Gramajo, A. A., R. Della Picca, R., Garibotti, C. R., Arb ´o, D. G. Intra- and intercycle interference of electron emissions in laser-assisted xuv atomic ionization.Phys. Rev. A 94, 053404 (2016)

  32. [40]

    Attosecond Double-Slit Experiment

    Lindner, F., et al. Attosecond Double-Slit Experiment. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 040401 (2005)

  33. [41]

    Streaking temporal double-slit interference by an orthogonal two-color laser field

    Richter, M., et al. Streaking temporal double-slit interference by an orthogonal two-color laser field. Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 143001 (2015)

  34. [42]

    Compact 200 kHz HHG source driven by a few-cycle OPCPA

    Harth, A., et al. Compact 200 kHz HHG source driven by a few-cycle OPCPA. J. Opt. 20, 014007 (2017)

  35. [43]

    secondary

    Gisselbrecht, M., Huetz, A., Lavolle, M., Reddish, T. J., Seccombe, D. P. Optimization of momentum imaging systems using electric and magnetic fields. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 76, 013105 (2005). Acknowledgments The authors thank Marcus Dahlstr ¨om, David Busto, Ivan Sytcevich and Fab...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.