Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 71 references

Orbital distortion and parabolic channel effects transform minima in molecular ionization probabilities into maxima

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that field-induced orbital distortion and higher parabolic channels, not excited-state effects, can reverse the orientation dependence of molecular tunneling ionization, turning a minimum in CH3Br into a maximum.

desk verdict Real technical contribution in the partial-wave reformulation, a credible min-to-max mechanism in CH3Br, but the quantitative field scale is model-dependent and needs convergence evidence. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.04096 v3 pith:WAUYR7BI submitted 2025-07-05 physics.atom-ph physics.chem-phphysics.comp-ph

Imam S. Wahyutama , Denawakage D. Jayasinghe , Francois Mauger , Kenneth Lopata , Kenneth J. Schafer This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.atom-phphysics.chem-phphysics.comp-ph
keywords tunnelingionizationweak-fieldasymptotictheoryorbitaldistortionparabolicchannelsorientationdependenceCH3Brpartial-waveexpansionstrong-field
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 two field-induced effects—distortion of the ionized orbital and the contribution of higher parabolic channels—can reshape the angular dependence of molecular tunneling ionization as the field grows, even where excited-state effects are negligible. The central demonstration is CH3Br: as the ionizing field increases, a local minimum in the orientation-dependent rate at the angle where the field points along the C–Br axis turns into a local maximum. In CO, orbital distortion alone moves the global maximum to the opposite orientation, bringing the theory into qualitative agreement with experiments that zeroth-order theory misses. The claim is carried by the one-electron weak-field asymptotic theory with first-order corrections (OE-WFAT(1)) and by agreement with independent time-dependent calculations. If the mechanism is right, angular ionization yields at high field cannot be read as a simple image of the field-free HOMO.

What carries the argument

The central object is OE-WFAT(1) in the integral representation, a tunneling theory in which the outer electron's wave function is expanded as psi approximately psi^(0) + F psi^(1) and the partial rate to each final parabolic channel nu=(n_xi,m) is kept to first order in the field. The paper's new mathematical result is a partial-wave reformulation: the distorted final-state functions $\Omega$^(0)_nu and $\Omega$^(1)_nu are expanded in spherical harmonics so that the expensive orientation-independent integrals are computed once and stored, and only cheap angular sums (Eqs. 25–28) are done per orientation. This makes full scans over Euler angles ($\beta$,gamma) affordable and isolates the two physical effects being studied.

What would settle it

Recompute the CH3Br orientation-dependent rates at F=0.0105 to 0.0125 a.u. with an orbital whose large-distance tail reproduces the true Coulomb decay, for example a grid or exponential basis fitted to the same ionization potential; if the beta=0 rate remains below its neighbors at every field instead of rising into a maximum, the minimum-to-maximum transformation is an artifact of the Gaussian asymptotic tail.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

At zeroth order, OE-WFAT(0), the field and orientation dependences of the rate factorize, so the angular shape of the ionization yield is field-independent. The first-order theory couples them through the field-induced orbital distortion and through the parabolic channels (0,±1). The paper's central claim is that in CH3Br the (0,0) channel's rate near beta=0 is suppressed by orbital distortion as the field grows, and the (0,±1) channels then take over and turn what was a local minimum into a local maximum (Eq. 18 and Fig. 7). In CO and OCS the same machinery identifies orbital distortion as the dominant field-dependent effect, with parabolic-channel contributions minor; in all three molecules the changes are shown not to come from HOMO-1 (excited-state) ionization, whose angular pattern peaks at the opposite orientation.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the field-free HOMO obtained from a tuned range-separated DFT calculation with a finite Gaussian basis has an asymptotic tail accurate enough for the orientation-dependent rates; the paper itself cautions that this tail limits the reliability of rate magnitudes at a particular field strength, so the field-dependent switch could in principle be an artifact of the model.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In CO, first-order orbital distortion is necessary to reproduce the experimentally observed shift of the global rate maximum to the C-to-O orientation as the field increases; the paper reports qualitative agreement with experiment and with RT-TDDFT.
  • In OCS, orbital distortion suppresses the rate around beta=0 degrees and leaves the peak positions unchanged, while contributions from the nu=(0,±1) parabolic channels remain negligible.
  • In CH3Br, omitting the (0,±1) channels leaves the beta=0 feature a minimum at all studied fields, so the minimum-to-maximum conversion requires both orbital distortion and parabolic-channel contributions.
  • OE-WFAT(1) in partial-wave form reproduces TR reference rates for noble gases and H2+ and gives speed-ups that grow linearly with the number of orientation angles, reaching about 1.5e4 for 18,029 orientations.
  • The first-order correction couples field and orientation dependences, so OE-WFAT(0)-based orbit-to-yield mapping fails as intensity increases; techniques that assume the HOMO-shape mapping become unreliable at higher fields.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Generalizing from CH3Br, any molecule whose nodal structure produces a rate minimum aligned with the field could show a similar minimum-to-maximum reversal once its (0,±1) channels become competitive; the CO and OCS cases suggest the ingredients are generic even though the reversal is not observed in every molecule.
  • The range of field strengths over which the reversal occurs is basis-sensitive in the paper's own account, so an experimental test at the TDCI field window (around F=0.05 a.u.) and at the OE-WFAT(1) window (around F=0.011 a.u.) would distinguish the physical mechanism from asymptotic-tail artifacts.
  • The computational speed-up makes it reasonable to use distortion-corrected rates in molecular orbital tomography and laser-induced electron diffraction inversions; those analyses currently assume a field-free HOMO shape, and correcting for distortion could change reconstructed orbitals at higher intensities.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a partial-wave reformulation of the one-electron weak-field asymptotic theory including first-order corrections (OE-WFAT(1)) in the integral representation. It validates the reformulation on noble gases and H2+, then applies it to field-dependent orientation-resolved ionization rates of CO, OCS, and CH3Br. The central physical claim is that two effects independent of excited states—first-order orbital distortion and contributions from parabolic channels (0,±1)—can change the orientation dependence of tunneling ionization as the field increases. In CO the global maximum shifts from the O-to-C to the C-to-O orientation; in CH3Br a local minimum at beta=0 (field along C-Br) turns into a local maximum at higher fields. The authors also demonstrate a large speed-up of the orientation scan via the partial-wave method (up to about 1.5 x 10^4 for CH3Br).

Significance. The claim, if established, challenges the standard orbital-image intuition that the orientation dependence of tunnel ionization maps the field-free HOMO shape at all but the lowest fields, and it provides a mechanism that does not require excited-state participation. The paper's strengths include a detailed analytical derivation of the partial-wave decomposition of the first-order parabolic-channel function, validation of atomic parameters against the tail-representation values, qualitative agreement with RT-TDDFT for CO and OCS, a public dataset, and an NWChem implementation. The main risk is that the CH3Br min-to-max transformation is governed by ratios of asymptotic Gaussian-orbital tails, whose accuracy is explicitly conceded to be limited, and the H2+ validation leaves an unresolved discrepancy with the tail-representation reference.

major comments (3)
  1. [III C, Fig. 7] The CH3Br calculations do not state the basis set used to generate the HOMO; for CO and OCS the text specifies cc-pvtz without diffuse augmentation. The central min-to-max transformation at beta=0 is decided by the field at which the (0,±1) parabolic channels overtake the (0,0) channel, i.e. by the ratio |g_{0,±1}|^2 / |g_{00}|^2, which is an asymptotic-tail quantity. The manuscript itself states (end of Sec. III B) that Gaussian-basis WFAT rates are 'less reliable for predicting the magnitude at any particular field strength,' and the OE-WFAT(1) crossover field in Fig. 7(a) (F about 0.0105-0.0125) is about a factor of four below the TDCI crossover (F about 0.045-0.055). Please specify the CH3Br basis, provide basis-set and Lmax convergence tests, and show that the crossover and the channel-ratio mechanism are stable under augmentation of the diffuse tail.
  2. [III A, Fig. 4] The H2+ results for both the 1s-sigma and 2p-pi+ states show noticeable deviations from the tail-representation results of Ref. [34], and the authors attribute this to the radial basis (FEDVR versus Laguerre) and to IR versus TR differences. Since H2+ is an exact one-electron system, both representations should converge to the same asymptotic rates in the complete-basis limit; an unresolved discrepancy here weakens the validation of exactly the first-order correction that drives the molecular conclusions. Please quantify the size of the discrepancy, test convergence with box size and radial-element parameters, and either resolve the difference or state its expected impact on the CO, OCS, and CH3Br rates.
  3. [III B, last paragraph; III C] The statement that Gaussian-basis WFAT rates cannot reliably predict field magnitudes is in tension with the paper's use of a specific field-dependent crossover as the central result. The paper needs an explicit sensitivity analysis—for example, rerunning CH3Br with a diffuse-augmented basis, with a range of tuned functionals, or with an exactly-tailed model HOMO—to show that the min-to-max transformation and its mechanism are not artifacts of the finite Gaussian tail. Without such a test, the claim that the mechanism is independent of excited-state effects is not fully separated from numerical artifacts.
minor comments (5)
  1. [I, Abstract] There is a typo in the Introduction: 'excited the state contribution' should be 'excited-state contribution'.
  2. [II B, Eq. (18)] The mixed-order approximation in Eq. (18), with Gamma_00 taken to first order and Gamma_{0,±1} taken to zeroth order, should be justified explicitly in the text rather than only by referencing the order of F in W_nu.
  3. [Fig. 7(a)] The left and right halves of Fig. 7(a) use different field ranges (TDCI: 0.045-0.055; OE-WFAT(1): 0.0105-0.0125); the caption should state this explicitly so readers do not interpret the two panels as directly comparable field strengths.
  4. [IV, Data availability] The dataset DOI in Ref. [71] is welcome; please state in the main text that the data and code underlying the figures are available, rather than only in a reference.
  5. [Table I] The comparison with Ref. [36] reports a00 and B00, but A00 is also listed in the table; please state in the caption or text whether A00 was compared and with what agreement.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: OE-WFAT(1) is an independent theory, and the CH3Br min-to-max claim follows from a first-principles ablation rather than from any fit or definition.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained. OE-WFAT(1) is imported from Dnestryan and Tolstikhin (Ref. 21) and Trinh et al. (Refs. 34 and 36), external to the author group, and the new partial-wave reformulation is validated against the explicit integral representation (Eqs. 11-12) and against the TR data of Refs. 34 and 36 (Table I, Figs. 2-4). The molecular inputs (tuned LC-PBE0* orbitals, cc-pvtz basis, optimal-origin prescription) are standard electronic-structure choices; no parameter is fitted to the orientation-dependent rates or to the field at which the CH3Br minimum becomes a maximum. The normalized rate Gamma-tilde = Gamma/W00 is a beta-independent rescaling, so it cannot create or move extremal structure in the total rate. The CH3Br mechanism (Sec. III C) is an ablation: the lowest-three-channel approximation Eq. 18 is fixed by WFAT, and the right half of Fig. 7(b) simply omits Gamma(0)_(0,+-1) to reveal their role; this is a diagnostic decomposition, not a definition of the outcome. The authors' caveat that the limited accuracy of the ionization potential and the imperfect asymptotic tail modeled by Gaussian basis makes WFAT rates less reliable for predicting the magnitude at any particular field strength (end of Sec. III B) is a legitimate robustness concern, as are the factor-of-four field-range offset relative to TDCI and the unspecified CH3Br basis set, but those are accuracy/validity risks, not circularity: the tail is an input orbital property, not derived from the predicted yield shape. Self-citations (Refs. 26, 27, 59) are methodological and are not load-bearing for the core claim.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The results rest on the OE-WFAT(1) first-order perturbation framework and on quantum-chemistry inputs (DFT or HF orbitals, Gaussian bases, tuned parameters). The tuned parameters are fitted to molecular properties, not to the ionization yields that are the object of the claim, so they do not make the main result circular, but they do add uncertainty.

free parameters (3)
  • Screening parameters u1, u2 for noble gas model potentials = Ne: 1.704, 2.810; Ar: 0.933, 3.600; Kr: 1.340, 4.311; Xe: 1.048, 5.197
    Used in Eq. (36) to model the effective potential and tune the ionization potential. These values are fitted, but only for the validation calculations on noble gases, not for the molecular claims.
  • Range-separated functional parameters alpha_RS, gamma_RS for CO = alpha_RS = 0.27, gamma_RS = 0.37
    Tuned range-separated LC-PBE0* functional used to produce the CO HOMO. These parameters affect the orbital energy and tail, and thus the computed rates.
  • Range-separated functional parameters alpha_RS, gamma_RS for OCS = alpha_RS = 0, gamma_RS = 0.409
    Same tuning for OCS. These are computational inputs chosen by the authors, not fitted to ionization yields.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Single-active-electron approximation: the outermost electron moves in a frozen effective potential V(r) while other electrons are screening.
    Introduced in Sec. II A; the paper notes OE-WFAT(1) is most suitable for molecules with low correlation (Sec. IV).
  • domain assumption First-order perturbation theory in the field is sufficient for the field strengths studied; higher orders are neglected.
    Used throughout Eq. (8) and Appendix A; the paper cites Ref. [35] for the dominance of first-order distortion in the applicable range.
  • domain assumption Static-field and adiabatic tunneling approximations apply.
    The theory solves a time-independent Schrodinger equation with a static field (Eq. 1), valid for low-frequency long-wavelength lasers.
  • domain assumption The optimal origin prescription and the approximation that the origin shift for degenerate HOMOs is negligible.
    Appendix B and Sec. II D; the origin change for CH3Br is verified to be about 0.04 bohr, but the approximation is load-bearing for the degenerate treatment.
  • domain assumption The asymptotic tail of Gaussian-basis orbitals is sufficiently accurate.
    Acknowledged limitation in Sec. III B; all molecular rate calculations use Gaussian basis sets and the tail determines the rates.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Orbital distortion and parabolic channel effects transform minima in molecular ionization probabilities into maxima." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WAUYR7BI

@misc{pith2026250704096,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Orbital distortion and parabolic channel effects transform minima in molecular ionization probabilities into maxima},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WAUYR7BI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.04096}
}
abstract

In the tunneling regime and at sufficiently low field amplitudes, the shape of orientation-dependent molecular ionization rate curves usually resembles the shape of the ionized orbital. As the ionizing field strength increases, the shape of the ionization rate can deviate from this pattern. The oft-cited explanation is that the increasing contribution of excited states relative to the ground state modifies the distribution. In this paper, we show that orbital distortion and parabolic channel effects, which are independent of excited-state effects, can also significantly modify the angular dependence of the yields of widely studied molecules where excited state effects are negligible. For example, we find that in CH$_3$Br, the interplay between orbital distortion and parabolic channel effects transforms a local minimum in the orientation-dependent ionization rate to a local maximum as the ionizing field strength increases. To simulate orbital distortion and parabolic channel effects, we use the one-electron weak-field asymptotic theory including the first-order correction (OE-WFAT(1)) in the integral representation. Since OE-WFAT(1) incurs expensive computations when the number of orientation angles is large, we also reformulate the original OE-WFAT(1) algorithm into a partial-wave expansion form, which greatly enhances the efficiency of the method.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.04096 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. An illustration of Euler orientation angles ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Normalized ionization rate from Ar for a range of field [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Angular momentum convergence of Γ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Normalized rates from the (a) 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (c) shows the convergence behavior of the nor￾malized ionization rates of CO in terms of Lmax. The curve reaches convergence at Lmax = 6. Running OE￾WFAT(1) simulations on 101 different β points to pro￾duce [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (c), which shows ionization rates from HOMO-1. It is evident that orbital distortion causes the lobe at β = 0◦ to become weaker relative to the lobe at β = 180◦ as the field strength increases. This means that as field-induced effects become stronger, one can expect to…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. (a-e) Orientation-dependent ionization rates from CH [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages

  1. [34]

    V. H. Trinh, V. N. T. Pham, O. I. Tolstikhin, and T. Mor- ishita, Weak-field asymptotic theory of tunneling ioniza- tion including the first-order correction terms: Applica- tion to molecules, Phys. Rev. A91, 063410 (2015)

    work page 2015

  2. [1]

    Itatani, J

    J. Itatani, J. Levesque, D. Zeidler, H. Niikura, H. P´ epin, J.-C. Kieffer, P. B. Corkum, and D. M. Villeneuve, Tomo- graphic imaging of molecular orbitals, Nature432, 867 (2004)

    work page 2004

  3. [2]

    Patchkovskii, Z

    S. Patchkovskii, Z. Zhao, T. Brabec, and D. M. Vil- leneuve, High harmonic generation and molecular orbital tomography in multielectron systems: Beyond the sin- gle active electron approximation, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 123003 (2006)

    work page 2006

  4. [3]

    Haessler, J

    S. Haessler, J. Caillat, W. Boutu, C. Giovanetti-Teixeira, T. Ruchon, T. Auguste, Z. Diveki, P. Breger, A. Ma- quet, B. Carr´ e,et al., Attosecond imaging of molecular electronic wavepackets, Nat. Phys.6, 200 (2010)

    work page 2010

  5. [4]

    Vozzi, M

    C. Vozzi, M. Negro, F. Calegari, G. Sansone, M. Nisoli, S. De Silvestri, and S. Stagira, Generalized molecular or- bital tomography, Nat. Phys.7, 822 (2011)

    work page 2011

  6. [5]

    Negro, M

    M. Negro, M. Devetta, D. Faccial´ a, S. De Silvestri, C. Vozzi, and S. Stagira, High-order harmonic spec- troscopy for molecular imaging of polyatomic molecules, Faraday Discuss.171, 133 (2014)

    work page 2014

  7. [6]

    Z. Ren, B. Zhang, Y. Yang, Y. Zhu, J. Zhao, and Z. Zhao, Molecular orbital tomography of HOMO and HOMO-1 of the nonlinear molecule H 2O: The study on multi-orbital effects, Results Phys.55, 107181 (2023)

    work page 2023

  8. [7]

    Z. Ren, B. Zhang, Y. Yang, Y. Zhu, G. Bai, J. Liu, J. Zhao, and Z. Zhao, SLIMP 2.0: A new version of strong laser interaction model package for atoms and molecules, now with molecular orbital tomography based on high- order harmonic spectra, Comput. Phys. Commun.301, 109213 (2024)

    work page 2024

Show all 71 references
  1. [8]

    Meckel, D

    M. Meckel, D. Comtois, D. Zeidler, A. Staudte, D. Paviˇ ci´ c, H. C. Bandulet, H. P´ epin, J. C. Kieffer, R. D¨ orner, D. M. Villeneuve, and P. B. Corkum, Laser- induced electron tunneling and diffraction, Science320, 1478 (2008)

    2008

  2. [9]

    C. D. Lin, A.-T. Le, Z. Chen, T. Morishita, and R. Luc- chese, Strong-field rescattering physics—self-imaging of a molecule by its own electrons, J. Phys. B43, 122001 (2010)

    2010

  3. [10]

    J. Xu, Z. Chen, A.-T. Le, and C. D. Lin, Self-imaging of molecules from diffraction spectra by laser-induced rescattering electrons, Phys. Rev. A82, 033403 (2010)

    2010

  4. [11]

    Belsa, K

    B. Belsa, K. Amini, X. Liu, A. Sanchez, T. Steinle, J. Steinmetzer, A. T. Le, R. Moshammer, T. Pfeifer, J. Ullrich, R. Moszynski, C. D. Lin, S. Gr¨ afe, and J. Biegert, Laser-induced electron diffraction of the ultra- fast umbrella motion in ammonia, Struct. Dyn.8, 014301 (2021)

    2021

  5. [12]

    P. B. Corkum, Plasma perspective on strong field multi- photon ionization, Phys. Rev. Lett.71, 1994 (1993)

    1993

  6. [13]

    K. C. Kulander, K. J. Schafer, and J. L. Krause, Dy- namics of short-pulse excitation, ionization and harmonic conversion, inSuper-Intense Laser-Atom Physics, edited by A. L’Huillier, B. Piraux, and K. Rzazewski (Springer, New York, 1993) p. 95

    1993

  7. [14]

    K. J. Schafer, B. Yang, L. F. DiMauro, and K. C. Ku- lander, Above threshold ionization beyond the high har- monic cutoff, Phys. Rev. Lett.70, 1599 (1993)

    1993

  8. [15]

    M. V. Ammosov, N. B. Delone, and V. P. Krainov, Tun- nel Ionization of Complex Atoms and Atomic Ions in Electromagnetic Field, inHigh Intensity Laser Processes, Vol. 0664, edited by J. A. Alcock, International Society for Optics and Photonics (SPIE, 1986) pp. 138 – 141

    1986

  9. [16]

    X. M. Tong, Z. X. Zhao, and C. D. Lin, Theory of molecu- lar tunneling ionization, Phys. Rev. A66, 033402 (2002)

    2002

  10. [17]

    T. K. Kjeldsen, C. Z. Bisgaard, L. B. Madsen, and H. Stapelfeldt, Influence of molecular symmetry on strong-field ionization: Studies on ethylene, benzene, flu- orobenzene, and chlorofluorobenzene, Phys. Rev. A71, 013418 (2005)

    2005

  11. [18]

    Murray, W.-K

    R. Murray, W.-K. Liu, and M. Y. Ivanov, Partial fourier- transform approach to tunnel ionization: Atomic sys- tems, Phys. Rev. A81, 023413 (2010)

    2010

  12. [19]

    O. I. Tolstikhin, T. Morishita, and L. B. Madsen, Theory of tunneling ionization of molecules: Weak-field asymp- totics including dipole effects, Phys. Rev. A84, 053423 (2011)

    2011

  13. [20]

    L. B. Madsen, F. Jensen, O. I. Tolstikhin, and T. Mor- ishita, Structure factors for tunneling ionization rates of molecules, Phys. Rev. A87, 013406 (2013)

    2013

  14. [21]

    A. I. Dnestryan and O. I. Tolstikhin, Integral-equation approach to the weak-field asymptotic theory of tunnel- ing ionization, Phys. Rev. A93, 033412 (2016)

    2016

  15. [22]

    Liu and Y

    M. Liu and Y. Liu, Application of the partial-fourier- transform approach for tunnel ionization of molecules, Phys. Rev. A93, 043426 (2016)

    2016

  16. [23]

    O. I. Tolstikhin, L. B. Madsen, and T. Morishita, Weak- field asymptotic theory of tunneling ionization in many- electron atomic and molecular systems, Phys. Rev. A89, 013421 (2014)

    2014

  17. [24]

    I. Y. Tolstikhina, T. Morishita, and O. I. Tolstikhin, Ap- plication of the many-electron weak-field asymptotic the- ory of tunneling ionization to atoms, Phys. Rev. A90, 053413 (2014)

    2014

  18. [25]

    L. Yue, S. Bauch, and L. B. Madsen, Electron correla- tion in tunneling ionization of diatomic molecules: An application of the many-electron weak-field asymptotic theory with a generalized-active-space partition scheme, Phys. Rev. A96, 043408 (2017)

    2017

  19. [26]

    I. S. Wahyutama, D. D. Jayasinghe, F. Mauger, K. Lopata, M. B. Gaarde, and K. J. Schafer, All-electron, density-functional-based method for angle-resolved tun- neling ionization in the adiabatic regime, Phys. Rev. A 106, 052211 (2022)

    2022

  20. [27]

    I. S. Wahyutama, D. D. Jayasinghe, F. Mauger, K. Lopata, and K. J. Schafer, All-electron molecular tun- nel ionization based on the weak-field asymptotic theory in the integral representation, Phys. Rev. A111, 013117 (2025)

    2025

  21. [28]

    Mikosch, A

    J. Mikosch, A. E. Boguslavskiy, I. Wilkinson, M. Span- ner, S. Patchkovskii, and A. Stolow, Channel- and angle- resolved above threshold ionization in the molecular 19 frame, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 023004 (2013)

    2013

  22. [29]

    M. D. ´Spiewanowski and L. B. Madsen, Alignment- and orientation-dependent strong-field ionization of molecules: Field-induced orbital distortion effects, Phys. Rev. A91, 043406 (2015)

    2015

  23. [30]

    Hoang, S.-F

    V.-H. Hoang, S.-F. Zhao, V.-H. Le, and A.-T. Le, In- fluence of permanent dipole and dynamic core-electron polarization on tunneling ionization of polar molecules, Phys. Rev. A95, 023407 (2017)

    2017

  24. [31]

    Penka Fowe and A

    E. Penka Fowe and A. D. Bandrauk, Nonperturbative time-dependent density-functional theory of ionization and harmonic generation in OCS and CS2 molecules with ultrashort intense laser pulses: Intensity and orienta- tional effects, Phys. Rev. A84, 035402 (2011)

    2011

  25. [32]

    E. F. Penka, E. Couture-Bienvenue, and A. D. Bandrauk, Ionization and harmonic generation in CO and H 2CO and their cations with ultrashort intense laser pulses with time-dependent density-functional theory, Phys. Rev. A 89, 023414 (2014)

    2014

  26. [33]

    M. D. ´Spiewanowski and L. B. Madsen, Field-induced orbital distortion in high-order-harmonic generation from aligned and oriented molecules within adiabatic strong- field approximation, Phys. Rev. A89, 043407 (2014)

    2014

  27. [35]

    H. J. Silverstone, E. Harrell, and C. Grot, High-order perturbation theory of the imaginary part of the reso- nance eigenvalues of the Stark effect in hydrogen and of the anharmonic oscillator with negative anharmonicity, Phys. Rev. A24, 1925 (1981)

    1981

  28. [36]

    V. H. Trinh, O. I. Tolstikhin, L. B. Madsen, and T. Mor- ishita, First-order correction terms in the weak-field asymptotic theory of tunneling ionization, Phys. Rev. A 87, 043426 (2013)

    2013

  29. [37]

    L. B. Madsen, F. Jensen, A. I. Dnestryan, and O. I. Tol- stikhin, Structure factors for tunneling ionization rates of molecules: General Hartree-Fock-based integral repre- sentation, Phys. Rev. A96, 013423 (2017)

    2017

  30. [38]

    A. I. Dnestryan, O. I. Tolstikhin, L. B. Madsen, and F. Jensen, Structure factors for tunneling ionization rates of molecules: General grid-based methodology and con- vergence studies, J. Chem. Phys.149, 164107 (2018)

    2018

  31. [39]

    com/iswhy/nwchem/tree/FEATURE-WFAT(2025)

    NWChem (forked from upstream),https://github. com/iswhy/nwchem/tree/FEATURE-WFAT(2025)

    2025

  32. [40]

    S. Song, M. Zhu, H. Ni, and J. Wu, PyStructureFactor: A Python code for the molecular structure factor in tun- neling ionization rates, Comput. Phys. Commun.292, 108882 (2023)

    2023

  33. [41]

    Kraus, O

    P. Kraus, O. I. Tolstikhin, D. Baykusheva, A. Ru- penyan, J. Schneider, C. Z. Bisgaard, T. Morishita, F. Jensen, L. B. Madsen, and H. J. W¨ orner, Observa- tion of laser-induced electronic structure in oriented poly- atomic molecules, Nat. Commun.6, 7039 (2015)

    2015

  34. [42]

    P. M. Kraus, B. Mignolet, D. Baykusheva, A. Rupenyan, L. Horn´ y, E. F. Penka, G. Grassi, O. I. Tolstikhin, J. Schneider, F. Jensen, L. B. Madsen, A. D. Ban- drauk, F. Remacle, and H. J. W¨ orner, Measurement and laser control of attosecond charge migration in ionized iodoacet...

    2015

  35. [43]

    T. Endo, H. Fujise, H. Hasegawa, A. Matsuda, M. Fushi- tani, O. I. Tolstikhin, T. Morishita, and A. Hishikawa, Angle dependence of dissociative tunneling ionization of NO in asymmetric two-color intense laser fields, Phys. Rev. A100, 053422 (2019)

    2019

  36. [44]

    Tehlar, J

    A. Tehlar, J. T. Casanova, A. Dnestryan, F. Jensen, L. B. Madsen, O. I. Tolstikhin, and H. J. W¨ orner, High-harmonic spectroscopy of impulsively aligned 1,3- cyclohexadiene: Signatures of attosecond charge migra- tion, Struct. Dyn.11, 014304 (2024)

    2024

  37. [45]

    A. D. Becke, A multicenter numerical integration scheme for polyatomic molecules, J. Chem. Phys.88, 2547 (1988)

    1988

  38. [46]

    L. B. Madsen, O. I. Tolstikhin, and T. Morishita, Appli- cation of the weak-field asymptotic theory to the analysis of tunneling ionization of linear molecules, Phys. Rev. A 85, 053404 (2012)

    2012

  39. [47]

    D. A. Varshalovich, A. N. Moskalev, and V. K. Kher- sonskii,Quantum Theory of Angular Momentum(World Scientific, 1988)

    1988

  40. [48]

    T. N. Rescigno and C. W. McCurdy, Numerical grid methods for quantum-mechanical scattering problems, Phys. Rev. A62, 032706 (2000)

    2000

  41. [49]

    C. W. McCurdy, M. Baertschy, and T. N. Rescigno, Solv- ing the three-body Coulomb breakup problem using ex- terior complex scaling, J. Phys. B37, R137 (2004)

    2004

  42. [50]

    B. I. Schneider, L. A. Collins, and S. X. Hu, Paral- lel solver for the time-dependent linear and nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation, Phys. Rev. E73, 036708 (2006)

    2006

  43. [51]

    B. I. Schneider, J. Feist, S. Nagele, R. Pazourek, S. X. Hu, L. A. Collins, and J. Burgd¨ orfer, Recent Advances in Computational Methods for the Solution of the Time- Dependent Schr¨ odinger Equation for the Interaction of Short, Intense Radiation with One and Two Electron Sy...

    2011

  44. [52]

    (31), (30), and (23)) diverge

    We choose to use FEDVR instead of Laguerre-based DVR for the radial basis because the latter is sensitive to the choice of the scaling factor in the argument of the exponential prefactor appearing in Laguerre functions, which, if improperly chosen, can make the WF AT inte- gra...

  45. [53]

    H. Li, D. Ray, S. De, I. Znakovskaya, W. Cao, G. Lau- rent, Z. Wang, M. F. Kling, A. T. Le, and C. L. Cocke, Orientation dependence of the ionization of CO and NO in an intense femtosecond two-color laser field, Phys. Rev. A84, 043429 (2011)

    2011

  46. [54]

    J. Wu, L. P. H. Schmidt, M. Kunitski, M. Meckel, S. Voss, H. Sann, H. Kim, T. Jahnke, A. Czasch, and R. D¨ orner, Multiorbital Tunneling Ionization of the CO Molecule, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 183001 (2012)

    2012

  47. [55]

    Zhang, J

    B. Zhang, J. Yuan, and Z. Zhao, Dynamic core polar- ization in strong-field ionization of CO molecules, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 163001 (2013)

    2013

  48. [56]

    Saito, O

    R. Saito, O. I. Tolstikhin, L. B. Madsen, and T. Mor- ishita, Structure factors for tunneling ionization rates of diatomic molecules, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables103- 104, 4 (2015)

    2015

  49. [57]

    V. P. Majety and A. Scrinzi, Static field ionization rates for multi-electron atoms and small molecules, J. Phys. B 48, 245603 (2015)

    2015

  50. [58]

    Abu-samha and L

    M. Abu-samha and L. B. Madsen, Effect of multielectron polarization in the strong-field ionization of the oriented CO molecule, Phys. Rev. A101, 013433 (2020)

    2020

  51. [59]

    Sissay, P

    A. Sissay, P. Abanador, F. Mauger, M. Gaarde, K. J. 20 Schafer, and K. Lopata, Angle-dependent strong-field molecular ionization rates with tuned range-separated time-dependent density functional theory, The Journal of Chemical Physics145, 094105 (2016)

    2016

  52. [60]

    Hoerner and H

    P. Hoerner and H. B. Schlegel, Angular Dependence of Strong Field Ionization of CH3X (X = F, Cl, Br, or I) Us- ing Time-Dependent Configuration Interaction with an Absorbing Potential, J. Phys. Chem. A121, 5940 (2017)

    2017

  53. [61]

    Valiev, E

    M. Valiev, E. Bylaska, N. Govind, K. Kowalski, T. Straatsma, H. Van Dam, D. Wang, J. Nieplocha, E. Apra, T. Windus, and W. de Jong, Nwchem: A com- prehensive and scalable open-source solution for large scale molecular simulations, Comput. Phys. Commun. 181, 1477 (2010)

    2010

  54. [62]

    Apr` a, E

    E. Apr` a, E. J. Bylaska, W. A. de Jong, N. Govind, K. Kowalski, T. P. Straatsma, M. Valiev, H. J. J. van Dam, Y. Alexeev, J. Anchell, V. Anisimov, F. W. Aquino, R. Atta-Fynn, J. Autschbach, N. P. Bauman, J. C. Becca, D. E. Bernholdt, K. Bhaskaran-Nair, S. Bo- gatko, P. Borows...

    2020

  55. [63]

    Dimitrovski, M

    D. Dimitrovski, M. Abu-samha, L. B. Madsen, F. Filsinger, G. Meijer, J. K¨ upper, L. Holmegaard, L. Kalhøj, J. H. Nielsen, and H. Stapelfeldt, Ionization of oriented carbonyl sulfide molecules by intense circularly polarized laser pulses, Phys. Rev. A83, 023405 (2011)

    2011

  56. [64]

    J. L. Hansen, L. Holmegaard, J. H. Nielsen, H. Stapelfeldt, D. Dimitrovski, and L. B. Madsen, Orientation-dependent ionization yields from strong-field ionization of fixed-in-space linear and asymmetric top molecules, J. Phys. B45, 015101 (2011)

    2011

  57. [65]

    Johansen, K

    R. Johansen, K. G. Bay, L. Christensen, J. Thøgersen, D. Dimitrovski, L. B. Madsen, and H. Stapelfeldt, Alignment-dependent strong-field ionization yields of carbonyl sulfide molecules induced by mid-infrared laser pulses, J. Phys. B49, 205601 (2016)

    2016

  58. [66]

    S´ andor, A

    P. S´ andor, A. Sissay, F. Mauger, P. M. Abanador, T. T. Gorman, T. D. Scarborough, M. B. Gaarde, K. Lopata, K. J. Schafer, and R. R. Jones, Angle dependence of strong-field single and double ionization of carbonyl sul- fide, Phys. Rev. A98, 043425 (2018)

    2018

  59. [67]

    Abu-samha and L

    M. Abu-samha and L. B. Madsen, Multielectron effects in strong-field ionization of the oriented OCS molecule, Phys. Rev. A102, 063111 (2020)

    2020

  60. [68]

    A. S. Durden and H. B. Schlegel, Reducing the Cost of TD-CI Simulations of Strong Field Ionization, J. Phys. Chem. A128, 7440 (2024)

    2024

  61. [69]

    S´ andor, A

    P. S´ andor, A. Sissay, F. Mauger, M. W. Gordon, T. T. Gorman, T. D. Scarborough, M. B. Gaarde, K. Lopata, K. J. Schafer, and R. R. Jones, Angle-dependent strong- field ionization of halomethanes, J. Chem. Phys.151, 194308 (2019)

    2019

  62. [70]

    L. J. Slater, inHandbook of Mathematical Functions with Formulas, Graphs, and Mathematical Tables, edited by M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun (U.S. Dept. of Com- merce, New York, 1972) Chap. 13

    1972

  63. [71]

    Orbital distortion and parabolic channel effects transform minima in molec- ular ionization probabilities into maxima

    I. Wahyutama, D. Jayasinghe, F. Mauger, K. Lopata, and K. Schafer, Dataset for article “Orbital distortion and parabolic channel effects transform minima in molec- ular ionization probabilities into maxima”, 10.5281/zen- odo.15844886 (2025)

    2025 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.