Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 35 references

Continuous rainbow RABBITT investigation of resonant states in He and H$_2$

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A parity-based separation of the ionization amplitude recovers the pure two-photon part and maps entire resonant-series spectra in one TDSE run, with the logarithmic Hilbert transform linking phase and magnitude.

desk verdict Parity-separated crRABBITT is a real computational shortcut that works; the paper's only real gap is missing convergence detail, and the higher-order contamination worry is negligible at their intensities. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.08811 v1 pith:4J4WTK3W submitted 2025-02-12 physics.atom-ph

Vladislav Serov , Anatoli Kheifets This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.atom-ph PACS 32.80.Rm32.80.Fb42.50.Hz
keywords continuousrainbowRABBITTparity-basedamplitudeseparationattosecondinterferometryautoionizingstatesunder-thresholdexcitationslogarithmicHilberttransformtime-dependentSchrödingerequationFanoparameters
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 establishes a computational scheme, continuous rainbow RABBITT (crRABBITT), that turns the usual RABBITT sideband analysis into a continuous function of photoelectron energy. Because the target has definite parity, the one-photon ionization amplitude is odd and the two-photon amplitude is even, so a single symmetrization of the amplitude separates the two-photon component from the background without tuning the dressing-laser frequency. That separation yields RABBITT magnitude and phase across the whole spectrum at once, resolving series of autoionizing states above threshold in He and H2 and discrete 1s→np excitations below threshold in He, all from one time-dependent Schrödinger equation run. The same extracted parameters are then used to check a logarithmic Hilbert transform connecting RABBITT phase and magnitude, which the authors report as the first successful application of this transform to two-photon ionization.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the parity-symmetrized ionization amplitude An(k)=[An0(k)+Pn An0(−k)]/2, where An0(k) is the ionization amplitude of the ground-state target in the combined XUV+IR field and Pn is the parity of the residual ionic state n. Since one-photon absorption changes parity while two-photon absorption preserves it, this formula isolates the pure XUV+IR two-photon amplitude and is what allows B and C to be read off continuously. The paper combines it with a multiconfiguration two-electron TDSE solver on a discrete-variable-representation grid with exterior complex scaling and t-SURFFc amplitude extraction, and with Fano-profile fits for the resonant lineshapes, to produce the spectra and to test the logarithmic Hilbert transform C(E)=−(1/π)P∫ dx lnB(x)/(x−E).

What would settle it

Take a target with no definite parity, or raise the infrared intensity until higher-order sidebands appear, and compare the parity-separated B and C against a full frequency-tuned rRABBITT scan in the same energy window; a mismatch would show the symmetrized amplitude is not purely two-photon.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the parity of the target can be exploited to isolate the two-photon XUV+IR ionization amplitude exactly: with a positive-parity initial state, the one-photon amplitude is negative parity and the two-photon amplitude positive parity, so the combination An(k)=[An0(k)+Pn An0(−k)]/2 removes the one-photon background. This isolation makes the RABBITT parameters B and C continuous functions of photoelectron energy, resolving the entire series of resonant features in a single TDSE simulation and eliminating the need to repeat calculations at different IR photon frequencies. Applied to He and H2, it reproduces Fano parameters of autoionizing states, maps under-threshold np excitations, and provides the data needed to show that the logarithmic Hilbert transform relates the resonant RABBITT phase to the magnitude, extending the Kramers-Kronig program from single-photon to two-photon ionization.

Load-bearing premise

The whole construction assumes a target of definite parity probed by weak fields, so that symmetrizing the amplitude isolates a pure two-photon term from everything else; if parity is mixed or the infrared intensity is not weak, the extracted RABBITT parameters would be contaminated.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • All sidebands in a photoelectron spectrum can be analyzed at once rather than one by one, so resonant structure is mapped across a wide energy window in a single run.
  • Below-threshold discrete-state series appear as sharp magnitude peaks with damped π phase jumps, making target electronic structure visible without scanning the infrared frequency.
  • The logarithmic Hilbert transform check means RABBITT phase can be reconstructed from magnitude measurements in resonant two-photon ionization, potentially easing experimental phase retrieval.
  • The same parity separation should extend to any atom or symmetric molecule whose residual ionic state parity Pn is known.
  • The technique yields Fano parameters for two-photon resonances that have no synchrotron analogue, since those states decay into two non-resonant continua.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct experimental analogue would need to separate XUV-only and XUV+IR wavepacket components by their distinct angular distributions, as the paper notes; a testable design would verify whether the resulting continuous B and C match the parity-separated predictions.
  • If the logarithmic Hilbert transform holds for this two-photon case, it may also apply to circularly polarized RABBITT observables, whose under-threshold phase-magnitude relation has not yet been examined.
  • The requirement that only one ionic orbital be continuous suggests the method could scale to heavier atoms and molecules by enlarging the multiconfiguration basis, though that scalability remains an extrapolation rather than a demonstrated result.
  • Comparing crRABBITT results against conventional frequency-tuned rRABBITT in the same energy window would provide a quantitative cross-check of the parity-separation assumption.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a computational variant of rainbow RABBITT, called continuous rainbow RABBITT (crRABBITT), in which the two-photon XUV+IR ionization amplitude is isolated from a single TDSE run by exploiting parity: for a symmetric target, symmetrizing the ionization amplitude over photoelectron momentum removes the odd-parity one-photon contribution and leaves an even-parity amplitude that the authors identify with the two-photon process. From this amplitude the RABBITT magnitude B and phase C are obtained continuously across the photoelectron spectrum, allowing the authors to resolve whole series of autoionizing states in He and H2 as well as below-threshold 1s→np excitations in He without scanning the laser frequency. The extracted amplitude and phase are then used to test the logarithmic Hilbert transform (LHT) as a relation between the two-photon RABBITT magnitude and phase, which the authors claim as the first successful application of LHT to two-photon ionization.

Significance. If the parity-based separation were fully validated, crRABBITT would be a useful computational shortcut: one TDSE run would map out resonant structure over a broad spectral range that currently requires multiple frequency-tuned RABBITT calculations. The paper's TDSE results are internally consistent, and the Fano parameters in Table I agree reasonably with the cited literature for both He and H2, which gives some confidence in the underlying numerical method. The LHT test for two-photon parameters, if established, would be of methodological interest for attosecond interferometry. However, the central methodological step — the identification of the symmetrized amplitude with the pure two-photon amplitude — is not quantitatively verified, and the numerical convergence of the TDSE results is not documented, so the strength of the paper currently rests on an unexamined assumption.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. II, after Eq. (8)] The parity symmetrization An(k) = [An0(k) + Pn An0(-k)]/2 removes the odd-parity one-photon amplitude but retains all even-photon orders, not just the XUV+IR two-photon amplitude. In particular, an XUV+3IR (four-photon) amplitude has the same even parity and can interfere with the two-photon term to produce a contribution at the same 2ωτ Fourier component of the sideband signal. The paper states that the XUV and IR fields are weak and quotes the IR intensity as 1×10^10 W/cm^2, but it provides no quantitative estimate of the relative magnitude of the four-photon amplitude, nor does it compare the symmetrization result with the direct subtraction An0 − An_XUV that is described in the same paragraph. Without such a comparison, the extracted B and C parameters are not demonstrated to be pure two-photon RABBITT parameters.
  2. [Sec. III A, Figs. 1–3 and Table I] No convergence tests or numerical uncertainties are reported for the TDSE calculations. The quantitative outputs include Fano resonance widths as narrow as 8 meV in He and continuous phase C across resonances, so the resolution of the calculation matters directly for the central claims. The paper should specify the numerical parameters (radial grid and finite-element sizes, angular momentum truncation, number of configurations Ns, time step, ECS parameters, and APT pulse durations) and provide tests showing that the extracted B and C, and hence the Fano parameters in Table I, are converged with respect to these choices. Without this information the claimed 'very fine energy resolution' cannot be assessed.
  3. [Sec. II, Eqs. (7)–(8) and Figs. 2–4] The manuscript never states explicitly how the RABBITT parameters B and C of Eq. (1) are obtained from the extracted two-photon amplitude An(k). The reader is left to infer whether B = |An(k)| and C = arg An(k) for some fixed delay, or whether a delay scan is performed, and how the continuous spectra in Figs. 2–4 were constructed. The extraction formulas and the number of delays (if any) need to be stated so that the results are reproducible.
  4. [Sec. III B, Eq. (11) and Figs. 2–4] The evidence for the claimed 'first successful application of the LHT to two-photon ionization' is limited. In the above-threshold case, the LHT comparison is shown only for the He sp2+ resonance shifted by ±ω, where a single resonance is embedded in one RABBITT arm; the paper itself acknowledges that the relation would be difficult to establish when two or more resonances intertwine. In the below-threshold case, Fig. 4 shows only 'qualitatively similar' agreement with experiment. To make the LHT claim convincing, the authors should provide a quantitative measure of the difference between the LHT-derived phase and the direct TDSE phase in every shown case, and should specify the conditions under which the relation is expected to hold.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Introduction, paragraph 2] The word 'Menawhile' should be 'Meanwhile'.
  2. [Sec. III B, title] The word 'exciations' should be 'excitations'.
  3. [Fig. 2 caption] The caption reads 'B ans C'; it should read 'B and C'.
  4. [Conclusion] The phrase 'resolve tje whole series' contains a typo; it should be 'resolve the whole series'.
  5. [Sec. II, Eq. (4)] The notation ⌊NAPT/2⌋ is used without specifying that NAPT is odd; for NAPT = 41 the floor is unambiguous but a brief statement would help the reader.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the crRABBITT B/C extraction is from first-principles TDSE amplitudes, and the LHT phase comparison is an independent mathematical test benchmarked against direct TDSE and experimental data.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. The two-photon amplitude An(k) = [An0(k) + Pn An0(-k)]/2 is a parity-selection algebraic identity, not an ansatz fitted to the target B and C parameters; the RABBITT B and C are then defined as Fourier coefficients of the delay scan of sideband signals built from these amplitudes. The LHT (Eq. 11) is a standard Hilbert-transform relation applied to the magnitude B, and the resulting phase is compared with the independently extracted TDSE phase and with the measurement of Ref. [6]. The Fano parameters in Table I are fitted to the computed spectra, but they are used as a parametrization of the magnitude, and the phase comparison is not derived from those fits alone; Eq. (10) from Ref. [21] is a mathematical formula that can be checked independently. Self-citations such as Refs. [15-24] provide numerical methods and prior applications, but no load-bearing step reduces to an unverified assertion from the same authors. The possible retention of higher-order even-photon terms in the symmetrized amplitude is an approximation-risk concern, not a circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rely on fitted Fano parameters and standard domain assumptions of attosecond interferometry; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • Fano q parameters for He and H2 resonances = He sp2+: -2.95 (XUV-only), -0.93 (XUV+IR); H2: -0.75, -0.47
    Obtained by fitting Eq. (9) to the TDSE XUV-only and XUV+IR spectra in Table I; used to build the reference phase via Eq. (10) for comparison with the LHT.
  • Fano linewidths Gamma = He sp2+: 43 meV (XUV-only), 126 meV (XUV+IR); H2: 400 meV, 367 meV
    Fitted linewidths from the same spectra; broadened XUV+IR widths reflect overlap with the IR probe pulse.
  • Resonance energies E0 = He sp2+: 60.28 eV (XUV-only), 58.7 and 61.8 eV (XUV+IR); H2: 30.3 eV, 29.1 eV
    Centroid positions from the Fano fits; used to place resonances in the continuous spectrum.
  • Correlation parameters rho^2 = He sp2+: 0.53 (XUV-only), 0.59 (XUV+IR); H2: 0.73
    Fitted to account for decay into two continua in the XUV+IR case; enters Eq. (9) and the r, Q, gamma conversion used for the phase reference.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The initial target state has definite parity and the one-photon amplitude has opposite parity to the two-photon amplitude, so symmetrization An(k)=[An0(k)+Pn An0(-k)]/2 isolates the two-photon component.
    Invoked in Sec. II after Eq. (8); this is the core of crRABBITT and fails for targets without parity symmetry or if the amplitude separation is not exact.
  • domain assumption The XUV and IR intensities (1e14 and 1e10 W/cm2) are weak enough that the ionization amplitude is a coherent sum of one-photon and two-photon terms with no significant higher-order contributions.
    Used to define the two-photon amplitude An0(k)-AnXUV(k) and to interpret B and C via Eq. (1); higher-order IR absorption would contaminate the extracted RABBITT parameters.
  • standard math The two-photon ionization amplitude is analytic in the upper half of the complex energy plane and vanishes sufficiently fast at infinity, so the logarithmic Hilbert transform Eq. (11) applies.
    Assumed when testing the LHT; the paper relies on [21] and notes corrections for vanishing amplitude and log divergences in Sec. III B.
  • domain assumption Resonant features can be parameterized by the modified Fano profile Eq. (9) with constant rho^2, including two-photon resonances embedded in a probe-pulse envelope.
    Used to assign q, Gamma, E0, and rho^2 in Table I and to construct the Fano phase reference Eq. (10); overlapping H2 resonances are only partially separated.
  • domain assumption The numerical TDSE solution with the multiconfiguration expansion (3), DVR, ECS, and t-SURFFc extraction is converged for the stated photon energies and resonances.
    The paper cites previous work [23,25-27] for numerical details but reports no convergence tests in this manuscript.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Continuous rainbow RABBITT investigation of resonant states in He and H$_2$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4J4WTK3W

@misc{pith2026250208811,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Continuous rainbow RABBITT investigation of resonant states in He and H$_2$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4J4WTK3W}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.08811}
}
abstract

We employ Reconstruction of Attosecond Beating By Interference of Two-photon Transitions with an advanced energy resolution (rainbow RABBITT) to resolve under-threshold discrete excitations and above-threshold auto-ionizing states in the He atom and the H$_2$ molecule. Both below and above the threshold, the whole series of resonances is reconstructed continuously and at once by the parity based separation of the two-photon ionization amplitude. This allows for an efficient extraction of the RABBITT magnitude and phase parameters without the need for adjusting the laser photon frequency. The latter parameters are then used to test the validity of the logarithmic Hilbert transform which relates the RABBITT phase and magnitude in the resonant region.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.08811 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Photoelectron spectra of He in single XUV photon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Resonant [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: Resonant [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: RABBITT magnitude [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Kl¨ under, J

    K. Kl¨ under, J. M. Dahlstr¨ om, M. Gisselbrecht, T. Fordell, M. Swoboda, D. Gu´ enot, P. Johnsson, J. Cail- lat, J. Mauritsson, A. Maquet, et al., Probing single- photon ionization on the attosecond time scale , Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 143002 (2011)

    work page 2011

  2. [2]

    Kotur, D

    M. Kotur, D. Gu´ enot, Jim´ enez-Gal´ an, D. Kroon, E. W. Larsen, M. Louisy, S. Bengtsson, M. Miranda, J. Mau- ritsson, C. L. Arnold, et al., Spectral phase measurement of a Fano resonance using tunable attosecond pulses , Na- ture Communications 7, 10566 (2016)

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    Gruson, L

    V. Gruson, L. Barreau, ´A. Jim´ enez-Galan, F. Risoud, J. Caillat, A. Maquet, B. Carr´ e, F. Lepetit, J.-F. Her- gott, T. Ruchon, et al., Attosecond dynamics through a Fano resonance: Monitoring the birth of a photoelectron , Science 354(6313), 734 (2016)

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    Busto, L

    D. Busto, L. Barreau, M. Isinger, M. Turconi, C. Alexan- dridi, A. Harth, S. Zhong, R. J. Squibb, D. Kroon, S. Plogmaker, et al., Time-frequency representation of autoionization dynamics in helium , J. Phys. B 51(4), 044002 (2018)

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Isinger, D

    M. Isinger, D. Busto, S. Mikaelsson, S. Zhong, C. Guo, P. Sali` eres, C. L. Arnold, A. L’Huillier, and M. Gissel- brecht, Accuracy and precision of the rabbit technique , Phil. Trans. Royal Soc. A 377(2145), 20170475 (2019)

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Neorici´ c, D

    L. Neorici´ c, D. Busto, H. Laurell, R. Weissenbilder, M. Ammitzb¨ oll, S. Luo, J. Peschel, H. Wikmark, J. Lahl, S. Maclot, et al., Resonant two-photon ionization of he- lium atoms studied by attosecond interferometry , Fron- tiers in Physics 10 (2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Turconi, L

    M. Turconi, L. Barreau, D. Busto, M. Isinger, C. Alexan- dridi, A. Harth, R. J. Squibb, D. Kroon, C. L. Arnold, R. Feifel, et al., Spin–orbit-resolved spectral phase mea- surements around a fano resonance , J. Phys. B 53(18), 184003 (2020)

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Roantree, J

    L. Roantree, J. Wragg, H. van der Hart, and A. Brown, Energy- and angle-resolved spectral phases via semirela- tivistic ab initio rabbitt simulations , Phys. Rev. A 108, 023112 (2023)

    work page 2023

Show all 35 references
  1. [9]

    Alexandridi, D

    C. Alexandridi, D. Platzer, L. Barreau, D. Busto, S. Zhong, M. Turconi, L. Neorici` c, H. Laurell, C. L. Arnold, A. Borot, et al., Attosecond photoionization dy- namics in the vicinity of the Cooper minima in argon , Phys. Rev. Research 3, L012012 (2021)

    2021

  2. [10]

    V. J. Borr` as, J. Gonz´ alez-V´ azquez, L. Argenti, and F. Mart ´ ın, Attosecond photoionization delays in the vicinity of molecular Feshbach resonances , Science Ad- vances 9(15), eade3855 (2023)

    2023

  3. [11]

    Swoboda, T

    M. Swoboda, T. Fordell, K. Kl¨ under, J. M. Dahlstr¨ om, M. Miranda, C. Buth, K. J. Schafer, J. Mauritsson, A. L’Huillier, and M. Gisselbrecht, Phase measurement of resonant two-photon ionization in helium , Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 103003 (2010)

    2010

  4. [12]

    Barreau, C

    L. Barreau, C. L. M. Petersson, M. Klinker, A. Camper, C. Marante, T. Gorman, D. Kiesewetter, L. Argenti, P. Agostini, J. Gonz´ alez-V´ azquez, et al., Disentangling spectral phases of interfering autoionizing states from at - tosecond interferometric measurements, Phys. Rev. ...

    2019

  5. [13]

    Drescher, T

    L. Drescher, T. Witting, O. Kornilov, and M. J. J. Vrakking, Phase dependence of resonant and antireso- nant two-photon excitations , Phys. Rev. A 105, L011101 (2022)

    2022

  6. [14]

    D. M. Villeneuve, P. Hockett, M. J. J. Vrakking, and H. Niikura, Coherent imaging of an attosecond electron wave packet , Science 356(6343), 1150 (2017)

    2017

  7. [15]

    A. S. Kheifets and A. W. Bray, RABBITT phase transi- tion across the ionization threshold , Phys. Rev. A 103, L011101 (2021)

    2021

  8. [16]

    Kheifets, Revealing the target electronic structure with under-threshold RABBITT , Atoms 9(3), 66 (2021)

    A. Kheifets, Revealing the target electronic structure with under-threshold RABBITT , Atoms 9(3), 66 (2021)

    2021

  9. [17]

    A. S. Kheifets, Under-threshold RABBITT in argon , J. Phys. B 56(9), 095201 (2023)

    2023

  10. [18]

    Moioli, M

    M. Moioli, M. Popova, K. Hamilton, D. Ertel, D. Busto, I. Makos, M. Kiselev, S. Yudin, H. Ahmadi, C. Schr¨ oter, et al., Role of intermediate resonances in attosecond photoelectron interferometry in neon , arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.04240 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  11. [19]

    V. V. Serov and A. S. Kheifets, Angular anisotropy of time delay in XUV+IR photoionization of H + 2 , Phys. Rev. A 93, 063417 (2016)

    2016

  12. [20]

    V. V. Serov and A. S. Kheifets, Time delay in XUV/IR photoionization of H 2O, J. Chem. Phys. 147(20), 204303 (2017)

    2017

  13. [21]

    J.-B. Ji, A. S. Kheifets, M. Han, K. Ueda, and H. J. W¨ orner,Relation between photoionisation cross sections and attosecond time delays , New J. Phys. 26(9), 093014 (2024)

    2024

  14. [22]

    A. S. Kheifets, Resonant photoionization and time delay , arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.16696 (2024)

    2024

  15. [23]

    Serov, Time-dependent convergent close coupling method for molecular ionization in laser fields , arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.12455 (2024)

    V. Serov, Time-dependent convergent close coupling method for molecular ionization in laser fields , arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.12455 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    V. V. Serov and A. S. Kheifets, Fano-line-shape meta- morphosis in resonant two-photon ionization , Physical Review A 110(4), 043107 (2024)

    2024

  17. [25]

    V. V. Serov, Calculation of intermediate-energy electron- impact ionization of molecular hydrogen and nitrogen us- ing the paraxial approximation , Phys. Rev. A 84, 062701 (2011)

    2011

  18. [26]

    Puzynin, A

    I. Puzynin, A. Selin, and S. Vinitsky, Magnus- factorized method for numerical solving the time- dependent Schr¨ odinger equation, Comp. Phys. Comm. 126(1), 158 (2000)

    2000

  19. [27]

    V. V. Serov, V. L. Derbov, T. A. Sergeeva, and S. I. Vinitsky, Hybrid surface-flux method for extraction of the ionization amplitude from the calculated wave function , Phys. Rev. A 88, 043403 (2013)

    2013

  20. [28]

    Domke, K

    M. Domke, K. Schulz, G. Remmers, G. Kaindl, and D. Wintgen, High-resolution study of 1P o double- excitation states in helium , Phys. Rev. A 53, 1424 (1996)

    1996

  21. [29]

    Fano and J

    U. Fano and J. W. Cooper, Line profiles in the far-uv ab- sorption spectra of the rare gases , Phys. Rev. 137, A1364 (1965)

    1965

  22. [30]

    S´ anchez and F

    I. S´ anchez and F. Mart ´ ın,The doubly excited states of the H 2 molecule, J. Chem. Phys. 106(18), 7720 (1997)

    1997

  23. [31]

    Virtanen, R

    P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haber- land, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, E. Burovski, P. Peter- son, W. Weckesser, J. Bright, et al., SciPy 1.0: Funda- mental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python , Nature Methods 17, 261 (2020). 7

    2020

  24. [32]

    R. E. Burge, M. A. Fiddy, A. H. Greenaway, and G. Ross, The application of dispersion relations (Hilbert trans- forms) to phase retrieval , J. Phys. D 7(6), L65 (1974)

    1974

  25. [33]

    R. E. Burge, M. A. Fiddy, A. H. Greenaway, G. Ross, and W. C. Price, The phase problem , Proc. Royal Soc. London. A 350(1661), 191 (1976)

    1976

  26. [34]

    A. S. Kheifets, Characterization of XUV+IR ionization using the circular dichroic phase , Phys. Rev. Res. 6(1), L012002 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    A. S. Kheifets, Circularly polarized RABBITT on atomic shells with large orbital momentum , J. Phys. B 58(4), 045601 (2025)

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.