Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 39 references

Nondipole circularly polarized laser-assisted photoelectron emission

T0 review · 1 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper shows that in nondipole laser-assisted photoemission with a circularly polarized infrared field, the photoelectron sidebands shift opposite to the laser propagation direction while the streaking pattern follows the…

desk verdict Real extension of nondipole LAPE to circular polarization with checkable new predictions; but the D-F parameter sets violate the energy separation that justifies dropping IR ionization, so those PMDs are not the full signal. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.19378 v1 pith:KY2RX2ZA submitted 2024-12-26 physics.atom-ph

R. Della Picca , J. M. Randazzo , S. D. López , M. F. Ciappina , D. G. Arbó This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.atom-ph PACS 32.80.Fb32.80.Rm
keywords laser-assistedphotoelectronemissionnondipolecorrectionscircularpolarizationattosecondpulsetrainmomentumdistributionGordon-VolkovwavefunctionstreakingCooper-likeminimum
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 argues that when an atom is ionized by an XUV pulse train in the presence of a strong circularly polarized infrared laser, the photoelectron momentum distribution (PMD) factorizes into an intrapulse streaking pattern and an interpulse sideband pattern, even when first-order nondipole corrections are included. The sideband rings are displaced by $U_p/c$ opposite to the laser propagation direction, while the streaking pattern rotates with the instantaneous polarization direction. The paper also shows that emission appears in the $k_z=0$ plane, which is forbidden in the electric dipole approximation, and that this plane contains a polarization-independent Cooper-like nodal minimum. These are concrete, measurable signatures that would let ultrafast experiments see the transition from dipole to nondipole behavior.

What carries the argument

The central object is the first-order nondipole Gordon-Volkov wavefunction with effective momentum $\Pi(k,t)=k+A_0(t)+[k\cdot A_0(t)+\tfrac12 A_0^2(t)]\,\hat{z}/c$, which carries the $O(c^{-1})$ magnetic-field and photon-momentum corrections. Inserting this into the transition amplitude yields a generalized action $S(k,t)=at+b\cos\omega t+b'\sin\omega t$, from which the paper extracts the factorization into intrapulse streaking and interpulse sideband factors. The sideband factor gives the shifted spheres of Eq. (26), the streaking factor gives the surface $\Pi^2(k,t_0)=v_0^2$, and the dipole matrix element $\ell(t_0)$ produces the polarization-independent zero at $E=v_0^2/2$ in the $k_z=0$ plane.

What would settle it

Measure the full photoelectron momentum distribution for a circularly polarized IR field plus an XUV pulse train with $\omega_X$ above the ionization threshold, and check two predictions: the sideband spheres should shift by $U_p/c$ in the $-z$ direction, and the $k_z=0$ plane should show a nodal minimum at $E=v_0^2/2$ independent of the IR phase. Absence of either feature, or a shift in the $+z$ direction, would refute the central claims.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Within the nondipole strong-field approximation using the nondipole Gordon-Volkov wavefunction, the paper derives the transition amplitude for one-XUV-photon ionization assisted by a circularly polarized IR field and shows that the PMD is the product of a streaking factor and a sideband factor. For a pulse train with one XUV pulse per IR cycle, the sideband factor imposes spheres in momentum space, each centered at $k_z = -U_p/c$ relative to the dipole case, i.e., shifted opposite to the IR beam propagation direction. The streaking factor concentrates emission on a slightly deformed surface defined by $\Pi^2(k,t_0)=v_0^2$, whose center rotates with the instantaneous polarization vector. In the $k_z=0$ plane, the transition amplitude vanishes along the ring $k^2 = v_0^2$, giving a Cooper-like minimum that does not depend on the IR polarization state. As the nondipole parameter $\beta_0 = U_p/(2\omega c)$ grows, the PMD loses forward-backward symmetry and becomes narrower along the direction opposite to the instantaneous polarization.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation drops the channel where the IR laser itself ionizes the target, assuming its signal sits at energies well below the XUV sidebands; this energy separation does not hold for the strongest nondipole parameter sets, so those predicted momentum patterns may not be the complete observable signal.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Sideband maxima in the photoelectron spectrum move by $U_p/c$ opposite to the IR propagation direction, so their positions provide a direct momentum-space readout of the ponderomotive shift.
  • The streaking ring center follows the instantaneous polarization vector, extending attoclock-style timing to the nondipole regime.
  • Nonzero emission in the $k_z=0$ plane is a purely nondipole signature that should be observable without requiring relativistic intensities.
  • The Cooper-like minimum at kinetic energy $v_0^2/2$ is independent of IR polarization and appears for both linear and circular polarization, making it a reliable angular marker.
  • Increasing $\beta_0$ gradually breaks forward-backward symmetry and narrows the emission opposite to the instantaneous polarization, tracing the dipole-to-nondipole transition.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the sideband shift and the Cooper-like minimum are tied to $U_p$ and $v_0$, respectively, they could let experimentalists calibrate the laser intensity and the XUV photon energy in situ from a single momentum image.
  • For non-hydrogenic targets, the Cooper-like minimum's position should shift according to the initial orbital's dipole matrix element, potentially turning this nodal line into an orbital-sensitive probe.
  • For the high-$\beta_0$ parameter sets where $\omega_X < 2U_p$, the omitted direct IR ionization term may overlap with the XUV signal, so a full calculation including $T_{\rm IR}$ is needed to know whether the predicted patterns survive in that regime.
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

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a first-order-in-1/c nondipole SFA model for circularly polarized IR-assisted XUV photoionization. A time-periodic nondipole action is combined with the authors' earlier factorization results to write the pulse-train photoelectron momentum distribution as a product of intrapulse streaking and interpulse sideband factors. For a hydrogenic 1s target and six parameter sets spanning the dipole to nondipole regimes, the authors predict a sideband-sphere shift of Up/c opposite to the IR propagation direction, a streaking shift opposite to the instantaneous polarization, nonzero emission in the kz=0 plane (dipole-forbidden for their z-polarized XUV), and a polarization-independent nodal ring at E=v0^2/2 that they call a Cooper-like minimum. The calculations are restricted to the XUV-ionization amplitude T_XUV; the direct IR-ionization amplitude T_IR is dropped on energy-separation grounds.

Significance. The model is analytically transparent and internally consistent: the action, the factorization, and the saddle-point results follow from the stated nondipole Gordon-Volkov Hamiltonian without fitted parameters, and the sideband-shift and Cooper-like-minimum predictions are falsifiable in principle. If the neglected IR-ionization channel can be shown not to contaminate the displayed momentum windows, the work would provide a useful theoretical foundation for nondipole attosecond streaking and RABBIT-type measurements, complementing the recent experiment of Liang et al. (Ref. [22]). The main caveat is that the observable-signal claims for the high-beta0 cases are conditional on the validity of dropping T_IR; on the final-electron energy scale, that separation is not satisfied for cases C through F. The stress-test concern about the IR-ionization term is valid and is the basis for the major revision requested below.

major comments (1)
  1. [Sec. II.B (Eq. (16)), Table I, Figs. 6-8] The restriction to T_XUV is not supported for the parameter sets that produce the largest nondipole effects. The text justifies dropping T_IR by an energy-domain separation, but it compares 2Up with the XUV photon energy omega_X. The relevant final-electron energies of the XUV channel are set by Eq. (26): k^2/2 = n*omega + omega_X - Ip - Up + O(1/c). For the n=0 sideband this is 2.25 a.u. for every case in Table I, while 2Up is 3, 6, 8, and 24 a.u. for cases C, D, E, and F, respectively. The direct IR continuum therefore overlaps the XUV sidebands in exactly the high-beta0 cases. Since the physical PMD is |T_XUV + T_IR|^2, the plotted distributions are not the total observable photoelectron signal; the cross term also breaks the clean factorization in Eq. (25). In particular, the claimed nondipole emission in the kz=0 plane is an O(1/c^2) probability from T_XUV, but that same plane is populated by the circular IR alone already in the dipole approximation. The caveat in the discussion of Fig. 8 that contributions near the threshold would be obscured understates the contamination: for case F the IR continuum extends to 24 a.u., far beyond the 2.25 a.u. central sideband energy. The authors should either include T_IR (and the cross term) quantitatively and demonstrate that the displayed features survive, or restrict the observability claims to parameter sets with a genuine energy separation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table I] The listed value beta0 = 2.5/c for case A is not consistent with Up = 1/4 and omega = 0.0569, which gives beta0 approximately 2.2/c; please verify the entry.
  2. [Reference [12]] The citation of Eckle et al. is dated 2018, but the article appeared in Nature Physics 4, 565 (2008); please correct the year.
  3. [Throughout] There are several typographical issues: "framewrok" in Sec. I, "Cooper- like" in the abstract and Sec. III, and a duplicated "a)" in the Fig. 4 caption.
  4. [Abstract and Sec. II.C] The abstract's phrase "shift opposite to the IR beam propagation direction" for the sidebands is potentially misleading without the compensating anisotropic modulation discussed in Sec. II.C; consider adding a qualifier there.
  5. [Sec. III, Fig. 8 discussion] The sentence "across all parameter set" should read "across all parameter sets."

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the PMD predictions follow from the stated nondipole Gordon-Volkov Hamiltonian and periodic-structure identities, with no fitted parameters or definitional feedback.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is self-contained: the nondipole effective momentum Pi(k,t), the generalized action S, and the transition amplitude T_XUV are constructed from the stated Hamiltonian and the H(1s) dipole matrix element, and the key periodic properties in Eqs. (22)-(23) are restated explicitly rather than assumed from the target result. The factorization in Eq. (25) is quoted from the authors' earlier Ref. [19], but it is applied only after the periodicity conditions are verified in the present nondipole setting, so it functions as independent prior analytical support rather than a circular import. The sideband-sphere shift in Eq. (26) and the Cooper-like minimum in Eq. (32) are obtained by direct algebra from these equations, not by fitting or by defining the output into the input. No parameter is fitted to the plotted PMDs, and no claimed prediction is a renamed input. The restriction to T_XUV and the neglect of T_IR is a stated approximation that the paper itself flags near threshold; that is a validity limitation for the strongest nondipole cases, not a circularity. Therefore the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard strong-field and nondipole approximations rather than on fitted parameters or new physical entities. The main load-bearing assumptions are the SFA treatment of the final state, the DipA approximation, and the neglect of the IR ionization term, the last of which is not fully justified for all parameter sets.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The interaction Hamiltonian for the electron-laser coupling to first order in 1/c is H_L = E0(t)·(r - i (z·r)/c ∇) (Eq. 5).
    Taken from the prior literature (Refs. [23,24]); the Gordon-Volkov wavefunction of Eq. (6) is asserted to satisfy the Schrödinger equation to O(1/c).
  • domain assumption The XUV pulse can be treated within the dipole approximation, with nondipole effects arising only from the IR field.
    Justified by the parameter map in Fig. 1; the XUV wavelengths are long compared to the atomic size, but this is a stated modeling choice.
  • domain assumption The DipA approximation sets AXUV=0 in the Volkov phase.
    Borrowed from Ref. [31]; simplifies the generalized action and is stated to accurately describe single-photon XUV absorption.
  • domain assumption The photoelectron final state is a nondipole Gordon-Volkov state, neglecting the Coulomb potential (SFA).
    Standard strong-field approximation; no TDSE or experimental benchmark is provided.
  • domain assumption The transition amplitude is dominated by T_XUV; the IR ionization term T_IR is neglected.
    Stated in Sec. II B; the energy-domain separation is claimed but is not satisfied for cases D-F of Table I.
  • domain assumption The pulse train has the same period as the IR field and the XUV pulses are short enough for the saddle-point approximation to apply.
    Required for the factorization in Eq. (25) and the semiclassical model; the pulse duration is τX = T/6.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Nondipole circularly polarized laser-assisted photoelectron emission." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KY2RX2ZA

@misc{pith2026241219378,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Nondipole circularly polarized laser-assisted photoelectron emission},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KY2RX2ZA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.19378}
}
abstract

We theoretically study atomic laser-assisted photoelectric emission (LAPE) beyond the electric dipole approximation. We present a theoretical description for first-order nondipole corrections ($O(c^{-1})$ where $c$ is the speed of light) to the nonrelativistic description of the laser-atom interaction for a strong circularly polarized infrared (IR) laser field combined with a train of extreme-ultraviolet (XUV) laser pulses. We investigate the photoelectron momentum distribution (PMD) as the product of two main contributions: the intra- and interpulse factors. Whereas the interpulse factor gives rise to a sideband pattern with a shift opposite to the IR beam propagation direction, the intrapulse factor forms an angular streaking pattern following the IR time-dependent polarization direction. We explore the transition of the PMD from the dipole to the nondipole framework, showing the gradual break of the forward-backward symmetry as the laser parameters are varied. Furthermore, we find non-zero contributions in dipole forbidden directions independent of the IR polarization state, wherein Cooper-\textit{like} minima are observed. Our work lays a theoretical foundation for understanding time-resolved nondipole LAPE in cutting-edge ultrafast experiments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.19378 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (Color online) Intensity-frequency map indicating the threshold curves for the validity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (Color online) Sideband rings in momentum space. For this figure we use [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (Color online) Intersection between [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (Color online) a) Streaking PMD for H(1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (Color online) Same as Fig. 4 a), but changing the ionization time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_5.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: This is the same reason why we have previously found the same condition [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (Color online) Same as Fig. 4 a), but using the parameters labeled A to F in Table I. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. (Color online) Streaking PMD for cases A to C shown in the ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. (Color online) Same as Fig.7, but using the parameters labeled D to F in Table I. Cases D [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [22]

    Liang, M

    J. Liang, M. Han, Y. Liao, J.-b. Ji, C. S. Leung, W.-C. Jiang, K. Ueda, Y. Zhou, P. Lu, and H. J. W¨ orner, Attosecond-resolved non-dipole photoionization dynamics, Nat. Photon. 18, 311 (2024)

    work page 2024

  2. [1]

    H. R. Reiss, The tunnelling model of laser-induced ionization and its failure at low frequencies, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 47, 204006 (2014)

    work page 2014

  3. [2]

    Maurer and U

    J. Maurer and U. Keller, Ionization in intense laser fields beyond the electric dipole approxi- mation: concepts, methods, achievements and future directions, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 54, 094001 (2021)

    work page 2021

  4. [3]

    K. Lin, S. Brennecke, H. Ni, X. Chen, A. Hartung, D. Trabert, K. Fehre, J. Rist, X.-M. Tong, J. Burgd¨ orfer, L. P. H. Schmidt, M. S. Sch¨ offler, T. Jahnke, M. Kunitski, F. He, M. Lein, S. Eckart, and R. D¨ orner, Magnetic-field effect in high-order above-threshold ionization, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 023201 (2022)

    work page 2022

  5. [4]

    R. c. v. Kahvedˇ zi´ c and S. Gr¨ afe, Strong-field approximation with leading-order nondipole corrections, Phys. Rev. A 105, 063102 (2022)

    work page 2022

  6. [5]

    Hartung, S

    A. Hartung, S. Eckart, S. Brennecke, J. Rist, D. Trabert, K. Fehre, M. Richter, H. Sann, S. Zeller, K. Henrichs, G. Kastirke, J. Hoehl, A. Kalinin, M. S. Sch¨ offler, T. Jahnke, L. P. H. Schmidt, M. Lein, M. Kunitski, and R. D¨ orner, Magnetic fields alter strong-field ionization, Nat. Phys. 15, 1222 (2019)

    work page 2019

  7. [6]

    Minneker, B

    B. Minneker, B. B¨ oning, and S. Fritzsche, Generalized nondipole strong-field approximation of high-order harmonic generation, Phys. Rev. A 106, 053109 (2022)

    work page 2022

  8. [7]

    Ilchen and et al., Symmetry breakdown of electron emission in extreme ultraviolet pho- toionization of argon, Nat

    M. Ilchen and et al., Symmetry breakdown of electron emission in extreme ultraviolet pho- toionization of argon, Nat. Commun. 9, 4659 (2018)

    work page 2018

Show all 39 references
  1. [8]

    Willenberg, J

    B. Willenberg, J. Maurer, B. W. Mayer, and U. Keller, Sub-cycle time resolution of multi- photon momentum transfer in strong-field ionization, Nat. Commun. 10, 5548 (2019)

    2019

  2. [9]

    S. V. B. Jensen, M. M. Lund, and L. B. Madsen, Nondipole strong-field-approximation hamil- tonian, Phys. Rev. A 101, 043408 (2020)

    2020

  3. [10]

    H. Ni, S. Brennecke, X. Gao, P.-L. He, S. Donsa, I. Bˇ rezinov´ a, F. He, J. Wu, M. Lein, X.- M. Tong, and J. Burgd¨ orfer, Theory of subcycle linear momentum transfer in strong-field tunneling ionization, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 073202 (2020)

    2020

  4. [11]

    Førre, Nondipole effects and photoelectron momentum shifts in strong-field ionization by infrared light, Phys

    M. Førre, Nondipole effects and photoelectron momentum shifts in strong-field ionization by infrared light, Phys. Rev. A 106, 013104 (2022). 25

    2022

  5. [12]

    Eckle, M

    P. Eckle, M. Smolarski, P. Schlup, J. Biegert, A. Staudte, M. Sch¨ offler, H. G. Muller, R. D¨ orner, and U. Keller, Attosecond angular streaking, Nat. Phys.4, 565 (2018)

    2018

  6. [13]

    A. N. Pfeiffer, C. Cirelli, M. Smolarski, D. Dimitrovski, M. Abu-samha, L. B. Madsen, and U. Keller, Attoclock reveals natural coordinates of the laser-induced tunnelling current flow in atoms, Nat. Phys. 8, 76 (2012)

    2012

  7. [14]

    Goulielmakis, M

    E. Goulielmakis, M. Uiberacker, R. Kienberger, A. Baltuska, V. Yakovlev, A. Scrinzi, T. Westerwalbesloh, U. Kleineberg, U. Heinzmann, M. Drescher, and F. Krausz, Direct measurement of light waves, Science 305, 1267 (2004), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1100866

    2004 doi

  8. [15]

    Goulielmakis, M

    E. Goulielmakis, M. Schultze, M. Hofstetter, V. S. Yakovlev, J. Gagnon, M. Uib- eracker, A. L. Aquila, E. M. Gullikson, D. T. Attwood, R. Kienberger, F. Krausz, and U. Kleineberg, Single-cycle nonlinear optics, Science 320, 1614 (2008), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/...

    2008 doi

  9. [16]

    Drescher and F

    M. Drescher and F. Krausz, Attosecond physics: facing the wave–particle duality, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 38, S727 (2005)

    2005

  10. [17]

    V´ eniard, R

    V. V´ eniard, R. Ta ¨ ıeb, and A. Maquet, Two-color multiphoton ionization of atoms using high- order harmonic radiation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 4161 (1995)

    1995

  11. [18]

    A. A. Romanov, T. S. Sarantseva, A. V. Sviridov, A. A. Silaev, N. V. Vvedenskii, and M. V. Frolov, Streaking camera in the high intensity regime, Opt. Lett. 49, 1037 (2024)

    2024

  12. [19]

    Della Picca, M

    R. Della Picca, M. F. Ciappina, M. Lewenstein, and D. G. Arb´ o, Laser-assisted photoioniza- tion: Streaking, sideband, and pulse-train cases, Phys. Rev. A 102, 043106 (2020)

    2020

  13. [20]

    Della Picca, J

    R. Della Picca, J. M. Randazzo, S. D. L´ opez, M. F. Ciappina, and D. G. Arb´ o, Laser-assisted photoionization beyond the dipole approximation, Phys. Rev. A 107, 053104 (2023)

    2023

  14. [21]

    Y. Liao, Y. Chen, J. M. Dahlstr¨ om, L.-W. Pi, P. Lu, and Y. Zhou, Linearly polarized rabbit beyond the dipole approximation, Phys. Rev. A 110, 023109 (2024)

    2024

  15. [23]

    N. J. Kylstra, R. M. Potvliege, and C. J. Joachain, Photon emission by ions interacting with short intense laser pulses: beyond the dipole approximation, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 34, L55 (2001). 26

    2001

  16. [24]

    Joachain, N

    C. Joachain, N. Kylstra, and R. Potvliege, Atoms in Intense Laser Fields(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, Cambridge, UK, 2012)

    2012

  17. [25]

    Førre and S

    M. Førre and S. Selstø, Schr¨ odinger formulation of the nondipole light-matter interaction consistent with relativity, Phys. Rev. A 101, 063416 (2020)

    2020

  18. [26]

    Førre, Breakdown of the nonrelativistic approximation in superintense laser-matter inter- actions, Phys

    M. Førre, Breakdown of the nonrelativistic approximation in superintense laser-matter inter- actions, Phys. Rev. A 99, 053410 (2019)

    2019

  19. [27]

    Førre and A

    M. Førre and A. S. Simonsen, Generalized velocity-gauge form of the light-matter interaction hamiltonian beyond the dipole approximation, Phys. Rev. A 93, 013423 (2016)

    2016

  20. [28]

    T. K. Lindblom, M. Førre, E. Lindroth, and S. Selstø, Semirelativistic schr¨ odinger equation for relativistic laser-matter interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 253202 (2018)

    2018

  21. [29]

    Lewenstein, P

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

    1994

  22. [30]

    Amini, J

    K. Amini, J. Biegert, F. Calegari, A. Chac´ on, M. F. Ciappina, A. Dauphin, D. K. Efimov, C. F. de Morisson Faria, K. Giergiel, P. Gniewek, A. S. Landsman, M. Lesiuk, M. Mandrysz, A. S. Maxwell, R. Moszy´ nski, L. Ortmann, J. A. P´ erez-Hern´ andez, A. Pic´ on, E. Pisanty, J. ...

    2019

  23. [31]

    Della Picca, J

    R. Della Picca, J. Fiol, and P. D. Fainstein, Factorization of laser–pulse ionization probabilities in the multiphotonic regime, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 46, 175603 (2013)

    2013

  24. [32]

    D. B. Miloˇ sevi´ c, G. G. Paulus, D. Bauer, and W. Becker, Above-threshold ionization by few- cycle pulses, J. Phys. B 39, R203 (2006)

    2006

  25. [33]

    Argenti, and F

    ´Alvaro Jim´ enez Gal´ an, L. Argenti, and F. Mart ´ ın, The soft-photon approximation in infrared- laser-assisted atomic ionization by extreme-ultraviolet attosecond-pulse trains, New Journal of Physics 15, 113009 (2013)

    2013

  26. [34]

    A. A. Gramajo, R. Della Picca, S. D. L´ opez, and D. G. Arb´ o, Intra- and intercycle interference of angle-resolved electron emission in laser-assisted xuv atomic ionization, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 51, 055603 (2018)

    2018

  27. [35]

    Della Picca, A

    R. Della Picca, A. A. Gramajo, C. R. Garibotti, S. D. L´ opez, and D. G. Arb´ o, Nonconstant ponderomotive energy in above-threshold ionization by intense short laser pulses, Phys. Rev. A 93, 023419 (2016). 27

    2016

  28. [36]

    J. W. Cooper, Photoionization from outer atomic subshells. a model study, Phys. Rev. 128, 681 (1962)

    1962

  29. [37]

    Della Picca, P

    R. Della Picca, P. D. Fainstein, M. L. Martiarena, and A. Dubois, Zeros in the photoionization partial cross sections of H 2+, Phys. Rev. A 77, 022702 (2008)

    2008

  30. [38]

    Della Picca, P

    R. Della Picca, P. D. Fainstein, M. L. Martiarena, N. Sisourat, and A. Dubois, Cooper minima and young-type interferences in photoionization of one-electron molecular ions, Phys. Rev. A 79, 032702 (2009)

    2009

  31. [39]

    L. F. DiMauro, Attophysics: Atomic photography, Nature 419, 789 (2002). 28

    2002

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.