Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 60 references

Strong geometry dependence of the X-ray Thomson Scattering Spectrum in single crystal silicon

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In a single crystal of silicon, the inelastic X-ray scattering spectrum changes strongly with the orientation of the scattering vector through the lattice, and adiabatic TDDFT, averaged over the spectrometer's finite acceptance…

desk verdict A genuinely new XRTS dataset on oriented single-crystal Si with strong geometry dependence, but the TDDFT benchmark is weakened by an inferred, unmeasured rotation angle and visual-only agreement. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.19276 v1 pith:22BR2F4Q submitted 2025-01-31 cond-mat.mtrl-sci physics.plasm-ph

Thomas Gawne , Zhandos A. Moldabekov , Oliver S. Humphries , Karen Appel , Carsten Baehtz , Victorien Bouffetier , Erik Brambrink , Attila Cangi
show 12 more authors
Celine Crépisson Sebastian Göde Zuzana Konôpková Mikako Makita Mikhail Mishchenko Motoaki Nakatsutsumi Lisa Randolph Sebastian Schwalbe Jan Vorberger Ulf Zastrau Tobias Dornheim Thomas R. Preston
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.plasm-ph
keywords x-rayThomsonscatteringdynamicstructurefactortime-dependentdensityfunctionaltheorysinglecrystalsiliconplasmondispersionq-vectorblurringgeometrydependencefree-electronlaser
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

Ultrahigh-resolution X-ray Thomson scattering measurements on a single crystal silicon wafer, with the scattering vector sweeping through different orientations of the lattice at five scattering angles, reveal that the inelastic spectrum's shape changes strongly with the direction of the scattering vector. The paper argues that this geometry dependence is real and large, and that it can be understood as the plasmon response probing different reciprocal-lattice environments. It then demonstrates that time-dependent density functional theory at the adiabatic local density approximation level, averaged over the finite range of scattering vectors accepted by the spectrometer, reproduces the measured spectra at all five angles. This would validate a relatively simple ab initio approach for orientation-dependent electronic response in a covalent semiconductor and remove the need for energy-dependent broadening in such analyses.

What carries the argument

The central object is the electronic dynamic structure factor S(q,ω) of the crystal, computed by linear-response time-dependent density functional theory (TDDFT) in the adiabatic local density approximation (ALDA). The load-bearing mechanism is q-vector blurring: the masked spectrometer accepts photons over a range of scattering vectors with a uniform distribution, so the measured spectrum is a uniform average of the TDDFT spectra over five discrete scattering vectors spanning that range, rather than the spectrum at a single nominal q. The other key element is the unknown azimuthal rotation angle ψ of the crystal around the beam axis, which is not measured directly but inferred by visually matching TDDFT to the q=1.26 Å⁻¹ experimental spectrum, and then held fixed for all other scattering angles.

What would settle it

Measure the azimuthal angle ψ independently, for example by recording the crystal's diffraction spots with an area detector while rotating the sample, and then check whether TDDFT with that measured ψ reproduces the five spectra; or take a seventh scattering angle not used in the ψ determination and see whether the same TDDFT parameter set predicts it accurately. A failure of the fixed-ψ predictions at such an independent angle would falsify the claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the X-ray Thomson scattering spectrum of single-crystal silicon is strongly dependent on the orientation of the scattering vector relative to the crystal lattice, and that this dependence is quantitatively captured by linear-response TDDFT in the adiabatic local density approximation once the spectrometer's finite angular acceptance is correctly accounted for by averaging over the accepted scattering vectors. The paper further claims that this geometry-aware treatment removes the need for energy-dependent lifetime broadening, which earlier analyses argued was necessary to explain the smoothness of measured silicon spectra. A secondary claim is that ultrahigh-resolution XRTS data of sufficient quality for benchmarking can be collected several times faster than in a previous analogous experiment, even on a material that scatters more weakly.

Load-bearing premise

The argument rests on the assumption that the crystal's azimuthal rotation angle ψ around the beam axis was constant for all five scattering angles and that the value inferred by visual matching of TDDFT to a single spectrum (ψ = 22.5°) is correct; if the true angle differs or varies between angles, the benchmark comparison collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If correct, ALDA-TDDFT with q-vector blurring is a validated tool for interpreting X-ray Thomson scattering from single-crystal semiconductors, not just simple metals.
  • Treating the finite spectrometer acceptance as a uniform average over scattering vectors becomes the standard way to model ultrahigh-resolution XRTS spectra; treating it as a q-uncertainty bar would be an error.
  • Energy-dependent broadening schemes for silicon may be unnecessary, since the observed smoothing and wing broadening are attributable to the instrument geometry.
  • The dispersion of the Si plasmon cannot be meaningfully fitted with a single Bohm-Gross parabola when the scattering vector orientation changes, explaining the anomalous plasma frequency extracted from the raw peak positions.
  • Ultrahigh-resolution XRTS can be collected quickly enough to survey a wide spectral range before focusing on features of interest, broadening the applicability of the diagnostic.

Reading between the lines

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

  • (Editorial inference) If the inferred ψ can be checked by an independent observable such as a diffraction image, the same dataset would also calibrate the experimental geometry for future shots.
  • (Editorial inference) A natural next test is to apply the same geometry-averaged TDDFT to another single crystal with a predicted geometry-dependent DSF, such as fcc copper, where the d-band response may stress ALDA more than silicon does.
  • (Editorial inference) The q-vector blurring explanation for spectral smoothness implies that reducing the angular acceptance of the spectrometer would reduce the need for averaging, at the price of signal; a systematic scan of slit widths could confirm the mechanism.
  • (Editorial inference) If TDDFT can predict orientation-dependent spectra at ambient conditions, it could be extended to warm dense or isochorically heated crystals, where the predicted geometry-dependent shifts occur over small energy scales accessible only with this ultrahigh resolution.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports ultrahigh-resolution X-ray Thomson scattering (XRTS) measurements of single-crystal silicon at the European XFEL, with five scattering angles covering q from 0.55 to 1.73 Å⁻¹. The authors show that the inelastic spectrum depends strongly on the orientation of the scattering vector through the lattice, and they compare the data with linear-response TDDFT calculations in the adiabatic local density approximation (ALDA). They find that once the finite angular acceptance of the spectrometer (q-vector blurring) is accounted for by averaging over several TDDFT runs, the calculated spectra agree well with experiment without invoking energy-dependent broadening. The unmeasured azimuthal crystal rotation angle ψ is inferred by visually matching TDDFT to the q=1.26 Å⁻¹ spectrum and then using that same value for all other scattering angles. The paper also demonstrates that the experimental data were collected several times faster than a comparable earlier dataset, suggesting broader applicability of the ultrahigh-resolution setup.

Significance. If the central comparison is valid, the paper would be a valuable benchmark: it extends TDDFT validation for XRTS from a simple metal (Al) to a covalently bonded semiconductor, and it provides evidence that the excess spectral broadening previously attributed to energy-dependent lifetimes can instead be explained by q-vector blurring. The experimental data are high quality, the TDDFT simulation parameters are reported in sufficient detail for reproducibility, and the data are deposited with a DOI. The main weakness is the unmeasured angle ψ: because the theory being benchmarked is used to determine this geometric parameter from the same dataset, the independent-prediction claim is partially compromised. The authors explicitly acknowledge this caveat in Sec. 4.3, but the paper does not provide the quantitative sensitivity analysis needed to assess how strongly the benchmark conclusions depend on this choice. The significance is therefore conditional: the dataset and qualitative comparisons are valuable, but the headline claim that TDDFT accurately predicts the geometric dependencies needs additional support.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 4.3, Eq. (6)] The azimuthal angle ψ is not measured (Sec. 2.1) and is selected by visual comparison of TDDFT to the q=1.26 Å⁻¹ spectrum, after which the same ψ=22.5° is used to benchmark TDDFT against all other spectra. Since the q=1.26 point is the fitting target rather than an independent test, and no quantitative residual or χ² is provided for the other angles, the abstract's claim that TDDFT 'accurately predict[s]' the geometric dependencies is conditional on an unverified geometric premise. Please report a ψ-sensitivity analysis for all five q values (e.g., residual maps or a range of ψ consistent with the q=1.26 data) and, if possible, constrain ψ by an independent measurement such as wafer-flat orientation or diffraction.
  2. [Sec. 4.3, Figs. 6 and 7] The benchmark relies on visual agreement after normalizing each TDDFT curve to its maximum and scaling to the experimental intensity; the paper itself notes that at q=0.92 Å⁻¹ the TDDFT width is overestimated. This is exactly the kind of discrepancy that needs a numerical goodness-of-fit measure, including the experimental noise estimates described in Sec. 2, before the conclusion that TDDFT 'accurately models' the spectra is justified. Please provide per-spectrum residuals and a metric such as reduced χ² for the final averaged curves.
  3. [Sec. 4.1 and Sec. 4.3] The q-vector blurring is modeled by only five uniform Θ values with the azimuthal contribution estimated and neglected, and the Lorentzian smearing is fixed at η=0.1 eV. Since the claim that energy-dependent broadening is unnecessary rests on the adequacy of this blurring treatment, the sensitivity of the averaged spectra to the number of Θ samples, to the azimuthal coverage in Eq. (7), and to η should be documented; otherwise the comparison to Ref. [38] is not fully supported.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 2] In the target description, 'here here' should be 'here'.
  2. [Sec. 4.3] The phrase 'the number of die in the DCA is uniform in q' is unclear; presumably 'dice' or 'pixels' is meant.
  3. [Fig. 7 caption] The caption should state explicitly how the TDDFT curves were normalized and scaled to the experimental data, and whether the experimental uncertainty estimates are shown.
  4. [Sec. 5] The phrase 'another recently reported dataset' should cite Ref. [34] more precisely, as it does earlier in the text.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

TDDFT benchmark of geometric dependence is partially circular: ψ=22.5° is inferred by visually matching the q=1.26 Å⁻¹ spectrum, making that panel a fit target rather than a prediction.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. 4.3 (Comparison of theory to experiment), first paragraph; also Sec. 2.1 (Experimental Geometry)]
    "we compared the shape of the DSFs predicted by TDDFT for different values of ψ to the experimental data at q = 1.26 Å⁻¹ (since the theoretical DSF is most sensitive to the specific orientation scattering vector here), and concluded the best visual agreement came from using ψ = 22.5°. Here, this value of ψ is now used to compare all TDDFT-predicted DSF to all the experimental spectra."

    The q = 1.26 Å⁻¹ comparison is not an independent prediction: ψ = 22.5° was selected by best visual agreement at exactly that wavenumber, so the TDDFT-vs-experiment match in that panel is the fitting target by construction. The abstract's claim that TDDFT can 'accurately predict' the geometric dependencies is then supported by Fig. 7, which includes that same calibrated panel. The other panels (q = 0.55, 0.92, 1.73 Å⁻¹) do provide genuinely independent predictions conditional on a fixed ψ, which is why the circularity is only partial. However, because ψ was never measured (Sec. 2.1) and no quantitative residual or sensitivity metric is given for the other q values, the paper's stated confidence rests in part on agreement at a spectrum that was used to determine the geometry parameter.

full rationale

The central benchmarking claim is not wholly circular: with ψ fixed at 22.5°, the comparisons at q = 0.55, 0.92, and 1.73 Å⁻¹ are nontrivial predictions of TDDFT, and their consistency with experiment provides real independent content. The problematic step is that the q = 1.26 Å⁻¹ spectrum is both the calibration target for the unmeasured azimuthal angle ψ and then displayed as part of the successful benchmark. The paper explicitly acknowledges this caveat in Sec. 4.3 and Sec. 5, but the acknowledgement makes the structural circularity transparent rather than removing it. No quantitative sensitivity analysis is provided for the other wavenumbers, so the range of ψ consistent with all four spectra is not established; the only stated constraint is qualitative (ψ ≥ 30° would worsen q = 1.26). The self-citations to Ref. [34] for the instrument, resolution, and q-vector blurring are not circular: that prior work is an independent experimental benchmark with its own measured Al data, and this paper uses it as a methodological reference, not as a premise that presupposes the Si result. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz-smuggling citation, or renaming of a known result is involved. The circularity is therefore localized and partial: one fitted geometric input (ψ) is incorporated into the predictive benchmark, affecting one of the four displayed comparison panels and the overall claim built on it. This corresponds to the 'one or more predictions reduce by construction' level, giving a score of 6.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The main benchmark rests on assumptions about ALDA validity, ambient sample conditions, the geometric scattering model, and the q-blurring approximation, plus one fitted geometric parameter psi. No new physical entities are introduced. The fitting of psi is the principal circularity burden.

free parameters (2)
  • crystal rotation angle psi = 22.5 degrees (inferred by visual agreement of TDDFT with q=1.26 Angstrom^-1 data)
    The experimental azimuthal orientation of the Si lattice about the beam axis was not measured; it is selected by best visual match of TDDFT to one spectrum, then applied to all comparisons. Section 4.3.
  • Lorentzian smearing eta = 0.1 eV
    Broadening parameter used in LR-TDDFT calculations; chosen by hand, not derived from data. Section 4.1.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption ALDA exchange-correlation kernel is accurate enough for the DSF of silicon
    The paper uses the adiabatic local density approximation and argues it suffices; invoked in Sec. 4.3 and 5.
  • domain assumption The sample remains at ambient temperature and density (no heating)
    The beam intensity on target (15.5-21.8 microjoule) is assumed too low to heat the silicon; stated in Sec. 2.
  • standard math The scattering vector is well described by q = Q(cos Theta - 1, sin psi sin Theta, cos psi sin Theta) with Q2 approximately Q (small energy loss)
    Geometry model in Sec. 2.1 and Eq. (6); assumes elastic approximation and exact crystal orientation.
  • ad hoc to paper q-vector blurring can be approximated by a uniform average over five TDDFT simulations along the polar direction
    Section 4.3 and Fig. 7; the finite DCA acceptance is modeled by averaging five q values, with azimuthal spread neglected.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Strong geometry dependence of the X-ray Thomson Scattering Spectrum in single crystal silicon." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/22BR2F4Q

@misc{pith2026250119276,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Strong geometry dependence of the X-ray Thomson Scattering Spectrum in single crystal silicon},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/22BR2F4Q}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.19276}
}
read the original abstract

We report on results from an experiment at the European XFEL where we measured the x-ray Thomson scattering (XRTS) spectrum of single crystal silicon with ultrahigh resolution. Compared to similar previous experiments, we consider a more complex scattering setup, in which the scattering vector changes orientation through the crystal lattice. In doing so, we are able to observe strong geometric dependencies in the inelastic scattering spectrum of silicon at low scattering angles. Furthermore, the high quality of the experimental data allows us to benchmark state-of-the-art TDDFT calculations, and demonstrate TDDFT's ability to accurately predict these geometric dependencies. Finally, we note that this experimental data was collected at a much faster rate than another recently reported dataset using the same setup, demonstrating that ultrahigh resolution XRTS data can be collected in more general experimental scenarios.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.19276 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) A schematic of the experimental geometry with respect to the crystal lattice. The red spheres represent the Si atoms. The black cube wireframe represents the conventional unit cell, while the red lines connecting the spheres inside the cell represent the Si bonds connecting the nearest-neighbour atoms. The beam direction q1 and the normal of the Si (100) crystal are both aligned the (1, 0, 0) direction. The scat… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The Si lattice in reciprocal space in the conventional unit cell. Shown in a) is the kx = 0 plane in units of 2π/a where a = 5.4309˚A is the lattice constant for the conventional unit cell in Si. The incoming photon q1 is aligned with the [100] direction (out of the page) and scatters with various q depending on the observed q2. The orientation around the [100] direction is unknown, therefore the q are shown as circ… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Measured XRTS intensity for five different wavenumbers as a function of the photon energy loss E = E0 − Es in units of integrated intensity in photons/shot. The curves are offset vertically for clarity and show the variation in position, intensity, and shape of the plasmon in silicon. The dashed lines over each curve shows the Voigt profile fitted to each peak which is used to determine the maximum position. actuall… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Dispersion of the Si (blue) and Al plasmon (red) from Ref. [34], including fits to these points (dashed lines) using the Bohm-Gross relation (Eq. (5)), and a second quartic fit for Si (dotted). Uncertainties in the fit parameters account for the calibration uncertainty…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of the experimental data (black) to the TDDFT calculations of the DSF of Si along the [111] (blue solid), [110] (green dashed), and [100] (red dotted) directions, for a scattering vectors q = 0.55˚A −1 and 1.26˚A −1 . 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison of the experimental data (black) to the TDDFT calculations of the DSF of Si at two central central scattering vectors of the DCA, but with outgoing wave vector rotated about the beam direction by an angle ψ in Eq. (6). blurring range. For simulations, atomic…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparison of TDDFT simulations of the DSF of Si, with ψ = 22.5 ◦ to the experimental signal (black). For each scattering vector, five TDDFT simulations at different q are shown as the blue-dashed lines in each plot. The average of these five simulations is shown as th…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 59 canonical work pages

  1. [38]

    Dynamic structure factor and dielectric function of silicon for finite momentum transfer: Inelastic x-ray scattering experiments and ab initio calculations

    Hans-Christian Weissker, Jorge Serrano, Simo Huotari, Eleonora Luppi, Marco Cazzaniga, Fabien Bruneval, Francesco Sottile, Giulio Monaco, Valerio Olevano, and Lucia Reining. Dynamic structure factor and dielectric function of silicon for finite momentum transfer: Inelastic x-ray scattering experiments and ab initio calculations. Phys. Rev. B , 81:085104, Feb 2010

    work page 2010

  2. [1]

    S. H. Glenzer and R. Redmer. X-ray thomson scattering in high energy density plasmas. Rev. Mod. Phys, 81:1625, 2009

    work page 2009

  3. [2]

    Gregori, S

    G. Gregori, S. H. Glenzer, W. Rozmus, R. W. Lee, and O. L. Landen. Theoretical model of x-ray scattering as a dense matter probe. Phys. Rev. E , 67:026412, Feb 2003

    work page 2003

  4. [3]

    Graziani, M

    F. Graziani, M. P. Desjarlais, R. Redmer, and S. B. Trickey, editors. Frontiers and Challenges in Warm Dense Matter . Springer, International Publishing, 2014

    work page 2014

  5. [4]

    Moldabekov, Kushal Ramakrishna, Panagiotis Tolias, Andrew D

    Tobias Dornheim, Zhandos A. Moldabekov, Kushal Ramakrishna, Panagiotis Tolias, Andrew D. Baczewski, Dominik Kraus, Thomas R. Preston, David A. Chapman, Maximilian P. B¨ ohme, Tilo D¨ oppner, Frank Graziani, Michael Bonitz, Attila Cangi, and Jan Vorberger. Electronic density response of warm dense matter. Physics of Plasmas , 30(3):032705, 03 2023

    work page 2023

  6. [5]

    Sheffield, D

    J. Sheffield, D. Froula, S.H. Glenzer, and N.C. Luhmann. Plasma Scattering of Electromagnetic Radiation: Theory and Measurement Techniques . Elsevier Science, 2010

    work page 2010

  7. [6]

    B¨ ohme, David A

    Tobias Dornheim, Maximilian P. B¨ ohme, David A. Chapman, Dominik Kraus, Thomas R. Preston, Zhandos A. Moldabekov, Niclas Schl¨ unzen, Attila Cangi, Tilo D¨ oppner, and Jan Vorberger. Imaginary-time correlation function thermometry: A new, high-accuracy and model- free temperature analysis technique for x-ray Thomson scattering data. Physics of Plasmas , ...

    work page 2023

  8. [7]

    Progress in warm dense matter study with applications to planetology

    Alessandra Benuzzi-Mounaix, St´ ephane Mazevet, Alessandra Ravasio, Tommaso Vinci, Adrien Denoeud, Michel Koenig, Nourou Amadou, Erik Brambrink, Floriane Festa, Anna Levy, Marion Harmand, St´ ephanie Brygoo, Gael Huser, Vanina Recoules, Johan Bouchet, Guillaume Morard, Fran¸ cois Guyot, Thibaut de Resseguier, Kohei Myanishi, Norimasa Ozaki, Fabien Dorchie...

    work page 2014

Show all 60 references
  1. [8]

    Becker, W

    A. Becker, W. Lorenzen, J. J. Fortney, N. Nettelmann, M. Sch¨ ottler, and R. Redmer. Ab initio equations of state for hydrogen (h-reos.3) and helium (he-reos.3) and their implications for the interior of brown dwarfs. Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser , 215:21, 2014

    2014

  2. [9]

    Kritcher, Damian C

    Andrea L. Kritcher, Damian C. Swift, Tilo D¨ oppner, Benjamin Bachmann, Lorin X. Benedict, Gilbert W. Collins, Jonathan L. DuBois, Fred Elsner, Gilles Fontaine, Jim A. Gaffney, Sebastien Hamel, Amy Lazicki, Walter R. Johnson, Natalie Kostinski, Dominik Kraus, Michael J. MacDon...

    2020

  3. [10]

    Haensel, A

    P. Haensel, A. Y. Potekhin, and D. G. Yakovlev, editors. Equilibrium Plasma Properties. Outer Envelopes, pages 53–114. Springer New York, New York, NY, 2007

    2007

  4. [11]

    Kraus, A

    D. Kraus, A. Ravasio, M. Gauthier, D. O. Gericke, J. Vorberger, S. Frydrych, J. Helfrich, L. B. Fletcher, G. Schaumann, B. Nagler, B. Barbrel, B. Bachmann, E. J. Gamboa, S. G¨ ode, E. Granados, G. Gregori, H. J. Lee, P. Neumayer, W. Schumaker, T. D¨ oppner, R. W. Falcone, S. H...

    2016

  5. [12]

    Kraus, J

    D. Kraus, J. Vorberger, A. Pak, N. J. Hartley, L. B. Fletcher, S. Frydrych, E. Galtier, E. J. Gamboa, D. O. Gericke, S. H. Glenzer, E. Granados, M. J. MacDonald, A. J. MacKinnon, E. E. McBride, I. Nam, P. Neumayer, M. Roth, A. M. Saunders, A. K. Schuster, P. Sun, T. van Driel,...

    2017

  6. [13]

    Lazicki, D

    A. Lazicki, D. McGonegle, J. R. Rygg, D. G. Braun, D. C. Swift, M. G. Gorman, R. F. Smith, P. G. Heighway, A. Higginbotham, M. J. Suggit, D. E. Fratanduono, F. Coppari, C. E. Wehrenberg, R. G. Kraus, D. Erskine, J. V. Bernier, J. M. McNaney, R. E. Rudd, G. W. Collins, J. H. Eg...

    2021

  7. [14]

    Recoules, J

    V. Recoules, J. Cl´ erouin, G. Z´ erah, P. M. Anglade, and S. Mazevet. Effect of intense laser irradiation on the lattice stability of semiconductors and metals. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 96:055503, Feb 2006

    2006

  8. [15]

    Quynh L. D. Nguyen, Jacopo Simoni, Kevin M. Dorney, Xun Shi, Jennifer L. Ellis, Nathan J. Brooks, Daniel D. Hickstein, Amanda G. Grennell, Sadegh Yazdi, Eleanor E. B. Campbell, Liang Z. Tan, David Prendergast, Jerome Daligault, Henry C. Kapteyn, and Margaret M. Murnane. Direct...

    2022

  9. [16]

    S. X. Hu, B. Militzer, V. N. Goncharov, and S. Skupsky. First-principles equation-of-state table of deuterium for inertial confinement fusion applications. Phys. Rev. B , 84:224109, 2011

    2011

  10. [17]

    Betti and O

    R. Betti and O. A. Hurricane. Inertial-confinement fusion with lasers. Nature Physics, 12(5):435– 448, May 2016

    2016

  11. [18]

    K. R. P. Kafka, S. X. Hu, H. Huang, V. N. Goncharov, and S. G. Demos. Imaging the dynamics of initial laser-driven shocks and blowoff plasmas in polystyrene under laser-direct-drive fusion conditions. Phys. Rev. Res. , 6:023013, Apr 2024

    2024

  12. [19]

    Fletcher, Karen Appel, Carsten Baehtz, Victorien Bouffetier, Erik Brambrink, Danielle Brown, Attila Cangi, Adrien Descamps, Sebastian Goede, Nicholas J

    Thomas Gawne, Hannah Bellenbaum, Luke B. Fletcher, Karen Appel, Carsten Baehtz, Victorien Bouffetier, Erik Brambrink, Danielle Brown, Attila Cangi, Adrien Descamps, Sebastian Goede, Nicholas J. Hartley, Marie-Luise Herbert, Philipp Hesselbach, Hauke H¨ oppner, Oliver S. Humphr...

    2024

  13. [20]

    Difference in x-ray scattering between metallic and non-metallic liquids due to conduction electrons

    Junzo Chihara. Difference in x-ray scattering between metallic and non-metallic liquids due to conduction electrons. Journal of Physics F: Metal Physics , 17(2):295, feb 1987

    1987

  14. [21]

    Interaction of photons with plasmas and liquid metals – photoabsorption and scattering

    Junzo Chihara. Interaction of photons with plasmas and liquid metals – photoabsorption and scattering. Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter , 12(3):231, jan 2000

    2000

  15. [22]

    B¨ ohme, Luke B

    Maximilian P. B¨ ohme, Luke B. Fletcher, Tilo D¨ oppner, Dominik Kraus, Andrew D. Baczewski, Thomas R. Preston, Michael J. MacDonald, Frank R. Graziani, Zhandos A. Moldabekov, Jan Vorberger, and Tobias Dornheim. Evidence of free-bound transitions in warm dense matter and their...

    2023

  16. [23]

    C. Ullrich. Time-Dependent Density-Functional Theory: Concepts and Applications . Oxford Graduate Texts. OUP Oxford, 2012

    2012

  17. [24]

    Dynamical response function in sodium and aluminum from time-dependent density-functional theory

    Marco Cazzaniga, Hans-Christian Weissker, Simo Huotari, Tuomas Pylkk¨ anen, Paolo Salvestrini, Giulio Monaco, Giovanni Onida, and Lucia Reining. Dynamical response function in sodium and aluminum from time-dependent density-functional theory. Phys. Rev. B , 84:075109, Aug 2011

    2011

  18. [25]

    Moldabekov, Michele Pavanello, Maximilian P

    Zhandos A. Moldabekov, Michele Pavanello, Maximilian P. B¨ ohme, Jan Vorberger, and Tobias Dornheim. Linear-response time-dependent density functional theory approach to warm dense matter with adiabatic exchange-correlation kernels. Phys. Rev. Res. , 5:023089, May 2023

    2023

  19. [26]

    A. D. Baczewski, L. Shulenburger, M. P. Desjarlais, S. B. Hansen, and R. J. Magyar. X-ray thomson scattering in warm dense matter without the chihara decomposition. Phys. Rev. Lett., 116:115004, Mar 2016

    2016

  20. [27]

    Young-Moo Byun, Jiuyu Sun, and Carsten A Ullrich. Time-dependent density-functional theory Strong geometry dependence of the X-ray Thomson Scattering Spectrum in single crystal silicon24 for periodic solids: assessment of excitonic exchange–correlation kernels. Electronic Stru...

    2020

  21. [28]

    Ab Initio Static Exchange–Correlation Kernel across Jacob’s Ladder without Functional Derivatives

    Zhandos Moldabekov, Maximilian B¨ ohme, Jan Vorberger, David Blaschke, and Tobias Dornheim. Ab Initio Static Exchange–Correlation Kernel across Jacob’s Ladder without Functional Derivatives. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation , 19(4):1286–1299, Feb 2023

    2023

  22. [29]

    Electronic density response of warm dense hydrogen: Ab initio path integral monte carlo simulations, 2022

    Maximilian B¨ ohme, Zhandos Moldabekov, Jan Vorberger, and Tobias Dornheim. Electronic density response of warm dense hydrogen: Ab initio path integral monte carlo simulations, 2022

    2022

  23. [30]

    Moldabekov, Mani Lokamani, Jan Vorberger, Attila Cangi, and Tobias Dornheim

    Zhandos A. Moldabekov, Mani Lokamani, Jan Vorberger, Attila Cangi, and Tobias Dornheim. Non-empirical mixing coefficient for hybrid xc functionals from analysis of the xc kernel. The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters , 14(5):1326–1333, 2023. PMID: 36724891

    2023

  24. [31]

    From density response to energy functionals and back: An ab initio perspective on matter under extreme conditions

    Zhandos Moldabekov, Jan Vorberger, and Tobias Dornheim. From density response to energy functionals and back: An ab initio perspective on matter under extreme conditions. Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics , 140:104144, 2025

    2025

  25. [32]

    Moldabekov, Thomas D

    Zhandos A. Moldabekov, Thomas D. Gawne, Sebastian Schwalbe, Thomas R. Preston, Jan Vorberger, and Tobias Dornheim. Excitation signatures of isochorically heated electrons in solids at finite wave number explored from first principles. Phys. Rev. Res. , 6:023219, May 2024

    2024

  26. [33]

    Ultrafast heating-induced suppression of d-band dominance in the electronic excitation spectrum of cuprum

    Zhandos Moldabekov, Thomas D Gawne, Sebastian Schwalbe, Thomas R Preston, Jan Vorberger, and Tobias Dornheim. Ultrafast heating-induced suppression of d-band dominance in the electronic excitation spectrum of cuprum. ACS omega, 2024

    2024

  27. [34]

    Moldabekov, Oliver S

    Thomas Gawne, Zhandos A. Moldabekov, Oliver S. Humphries, Karen Appel, Carsten Baehtz, Victorien Bouffetier, Erik Brambrink, Attila Cangi, Sebastian G¨ ode, Zuzana Konˆ opkov´ a, Mikako Makita, Mikhail Mishchenko, Motoaki Nakatsutsumi, Kushal Ramakrishna, Lisa Randolph, Sebast...

    2024

  28. [35]

    Stiebling and H

    J. Stiebling and H. Raether. Dispersion of the volume plasmon of silicon (16.7 ev) at large wave vectors. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 40:1293–1295, May 1978

    1978

  29. [36]

    C. H. Chen, A. E. Meixner, and B. M. Kincaid. Bulk plasmon dispersion in si for 0 < q <1.5qf . Phys. Rev. Lett. , 44:951–954, Apr 1980

    1980

  30. [37]

    Sch¨ ulke, J

    W. Sch¨ ulke, J. R. Schmitz, H. Schulte-Schrepping, and A. Kaprolat. Dynamic and static structure factor of electrons in si: Inelastic x-ray scattering results. Phys. Rev. B , 52:11721–11732, Oct 1995

    1995

  31. [39]

    Ulf Zastrau, Karen Appel, Carsten Baehtz, Oliver Baehr, Lewis Batchelor, Andreas Bergh¨ auser, Mohammadreza Banjafar, Erik Brambrink, Valerio Cerantola, Thomas E Cowan, Horst Damker, Steffen Dietrich, Samuele Di Dio Cafiso, J¨ orn Dreyer, Hans-Olaf Engel, Thomas Feldmann, Stef...

    2021

  32. [40]

    Descamps, B

    A. Descamps, B. K. Ofori-Okai, K. Appel, V. Cerantola, A. Comley, J. H. Eggert, L. B. Fletcher, D. O. Gericke, S. G¨ ode, O. Humphries, O. Karnbach, A. Lazicki, R. Loetzsch, D. McGonegle, C. A. J. Palmer, C. Plueckthun, T. R. Preston, R. Redmer, D. G. Senesky, C. Strohm, I. Us...

    2020

  33. [41]

    Wollenweber, T

    L. Wollenweber, T. R. Preston, A. Descamps, V. Cerantola, A. Comley, J. H. Eggert, L. B. Fletcher, G. Geloni, D. O. Gericke, S. H. Glenzer, S. G¨ ode, J. Hastings, O. S. Humphries, A. Jenei, O. Karnbach, Z. Konopkova, R. Loetzsch, B. Marx-Glowna, E. E. McBride, D. McGonegle, G...

    2021

  34. [42]

    Mozzanica, M

    A. Mozzanica, M. Andr¨ a, R. Barten, A. Bergamaschi, S. Chiriotti, M. Br¨ uckner, R. Dinapoli, E. Fr¨ ojdh, D. Greiffenberg, F. Leonarski, C. Lopez-Cuenca, D. Mezza, S. Redford, C. Ruder, B. Schmitt, X. Shi, D. Thattil, G. Tinti, S. Vetter, and J. Zhang. The JUNGFRAU Detector ...

    2018

  35. [43]

    Ashcroft and N.D

    N.W. Ashcroft and N.D. Mermin. Solid State Physics. HR W international editions. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1976

    1976

  36. [44]

    Oliphant, Matt Haberland, Tyler Reddy, David Cournapeau, Evgeni Burovski, Pearu Peterson, Warren Weckesser, Jonathan Bright, St´ efan J

    Pauli Virtanen, Ralf Gommers, Travis E. Oliphant, Matt Haberland, Tyler Reddy, David Cournapeau, Evgeni Burovski, Pearu Peterson, Warren Weckesser, Jonathan Bright, St´ efan J. van der Walt, Matthew Brett, Joshua Wilson, K. Jarrod Millman, Nikolay Mayorov, Andrew R. J. Nelson,...

    2020

  37. [45]

    Bohm and E

    D. Bohm and E. P. Gross. Theory of plasma oscillations. a. origin of medium-like behavior. Phys. Rev., 75:1851–1864, Jun 1949

    1949

  38. [46]

    Giuliani and G

    G. Giuliani and G. Vignale. Quantum Theory of the Electron Liquid. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008

    2008

  39. [47]

    group iv elements, iv-iv and iii-v compounds. part b - electronic, transport, optical and other properties

    Silicon (si), band structure: Datasheet from landolt-b¨ ornstein - group iii condensed matter· volume 41a1β: “group iv elements, iv-iv and iii-v compounds. part b - electronic, transport, optical and other properties” in springermaterials (https://doi.org/10.1007/10832182 432)...

    doi

  40. [48]

    Moldabekov, Jan Vorberger, Mani Lokamani, and Tobias Dornheim

    Zhandos A. Moldabekov, Jan Vorberger, Mani Lokamani, and Tobias Dornheim. Averaging over atom snapshots in linear-response tddft of disordered systems: A case study of warm dense hydrogen. The Journal of Chemical Physics , 159(1):014107, 07 2023

    2023

  41. [49]

    Quantum espresso: a modular and open-source software project for quantum simulations of materials

    Paolo Giannozzi, Stefano Baroni, Nicola Bonini, Matteo Calandra, Roberto Car, Carlo Cavazzoni, Davide Ceresoli, Guido L Chiarotti, Matteo Cococcioni, Ismaila Dabo, Andrea Dal Corso, Stefano de Gironcoli, Stefano Fabris, Guido Fratesi, Ralph Gebauer, Uwe Gerstmann, Christos Gou...

    2009

  42. [50]

    Advanced capabilities for materials modelling with quantum espresso

    P Giannozzi, O Andreussi, T Brumme, O Bunau, M Buongiorno Nardelli, M Calandra, R Car, C Cavazzoni, D Ceresoli, M Cococcioni, N Colonna, I Carnimeo, A Dal Corso, S de Gironcoli, Strong geometry dependence of the X-ray Thomson Scattering Spectrum in single crystal silicon26 P D...

    2017

  43. [51]

    Quantum espresso toward the exascale

    Paolo Giannozzi, Oscar Baseggio, Pietro Bonf` a, Davide Brunato, Roberto Car, Ivan Carnimeo, Carlo Cavazzoni, Stefano de Gironcoli, Pietro Delugas, Fabrizio Ferrari Ruffino, Andrea Ferretti, Nicola Marzari, Iurii Timrov, Andrea Urru, and Stefano Baroni. Quantum espresso toward...

    2020

  44. [52]

    Quantum espresso: One further step toward the exascale

    Ivan Carnimeo, Fabio Affinito, Stefano Baroni, Oscar Baseggio, Laura Bellentani, Riccardo Bertossa, Pietro Davide Delugas, Fabrizio Ferrari Ruffino, Sergio Orlandini, Filippo Spiga, and Paolo Giannozzi. Quantum espresso: One further step toward the exascale. Journal of Chemica...

    2023

  45. [53]

    Iurii Timrov, Nathalie Vast, Ralph Gebauer, and Stefano Baroni. turboeels—a code for the simulation of the electron energy loss and inelastic x-ray scattering spectra using the liouville–lanczos approach to time-dependent density-functional perturbation theory. Computer Physic...

    2015

  46. [54]

    We used the pseudopotential Si.pz-vbc.UPF from the quantum espresso pseudopotential data base: http://www.quantum-espresso.org/pseudopotentials

  47. [55]

    Electron energy loss and inelastic x-ray scattering cross sections from time-dependent density-functional perturbation theory

    Iurii Timrov, Nathalie Vast, Ralph Gebauer, and Stefano Baroni. Electron energy loss and inelastic x-ray scattering cross sections from time-dependent density-functional perturbation theory. Phys. Rev. B , 88:064301, Aug 2013

    2013

  48. [56]

    The atomic simulation environment—a python library for working with atoms

    Ask Hjorth Larsen, Jens Jørgen Mortensen, Jakob Blomqvist, Ivano E Castelli, Rune Christensen, Marcin Du lak, Jesper Friis, Michael N Groves, Bjørk Hammer, Cory Hargus, Eric D Hermes, Paul C Jennings, Peter Bjerre Jensen, James Kermode, John R Kitchin, Esben Leonhard Kolsbjerg...

    2017

  49. [57]

    Martin, Lucia Reining, and David M

    Richard M. Martin, Lucia Reining, and David M. Ceperley. Interacting Electrons: Theory and Computational Approaches. Cambridge University Press, 2016

    2016

  50. [58]

    Perdew and Karla Schmidt

    John P. Perdew and Karla Schmidt. Jacob’s ladder of density functional approximations for the exchange-correlation energy. AIP Conference Proceedings, 577(1):1–20, 07 2001

    2001

  51. [59]

    Perdew, Viktor N

    Jianmin Tao, John P. Perdew, Viktor N. Staroverov, and Gustavo E. Scuseria. Climbing the density functional ladder: Nonempirical meta–generalized gradient approximation designed for molecules and solids. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 91:146401, Sep 2003

    2003

  52. [60]

    Preston, Zhandos A

    Tobias Dornheim, Maximilian B¨ ohme, Dominik Kraus, Tilo D¨ oppner, Thomas R. Preston, Zhandos A. Moldabekov, and Jan Vorberger. Accurate temperature diagnostics for matter under extreme conditions. Nature Communications, 13(1):7911, Dec 2022

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.