Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Tunable, phase-locked hard X-ray pulse sequences generated by a free-electron laser

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A free-electron laser now emits tunable, phase-locked hard X-ray pulse triplets, with delays between 4.5 and 11.9 femtoseconds and a phase jitter equivalent to 0.1 attoseconds of arrival-time variation.

desk verdict First tunable phase-locked hard X-ray pulse triplets with a solid qualitative demonstration; treat the 0.1 as jitter and 3.8 fs duration as model-dependent estimates, not measured values. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.00455 v1 pith:3A33D3NS submitted 2025-08-01 physics.acc-ph physics.optics

Wenxiang Hu , Chi Hyun Shim , Gyujin Kim , Seongyeol Kim , Seong-Hoon Kwon , Chang-Ki Min , Kook-Jin Moon , Donghyun Na
show 12 more authors
Young Jin Suh Chang-Kyu Sung Haeryong Yang Hoon Heo Heung-Sik Kang Inhyuk Nam Eduard Prat Simon Gerber Sven Reiche Gabriel Aeppli Myunghoon Cho Philipp Dijkstal
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.acc-phphysics.optics
keywords phase-lockedX-raypulseshardfree-electronlaserfresh-bunchself-seedingslottedfoilultrafastpulseshapingquantumopticsarbitrarywaveformgenerationcoherentspectroscopy
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

Phase control, the ability to fix the relative phase between successive pulses, has long been routine at microwave through visible wavelengths but missing at hard X-ray energies. This paper reports the first tunable phase-locked ultrafast hard X-ray (PHLUX) pulses: a coherent triplet of pulses at 9.7 keV whose separation can be dialed from 4.5 to 11.9 fs and whose relative phase can be swept freely. The phase stays locked shot to shot, with a jitter equivalent to 0.1 attoseconds of carrier arrival time. The authors argue this opens coherent spectroscopy, X-ray quantum optics, and ultimately a hard X-ray arbitrary waveform generator.

What carries the argument

The central object is the PHLUX pulse train produced by splitting the electron bunch rather than the photon beam. A slotted emittance-spoiling foil in the bunch compressor spoils selected longitudinal slices so they cannot lase, leaving three unspoiled slices (a wide tail slit for the self-seeded SASE seed and two narrow head slits for coherent emission) whose transverse-longitudinal correlation, imprinted by a corrugated wakefield structure, lets the two undulator stages select different slices. The separated slices amplify a common self-seeded frequency, so the output is coherent radiation modulated on the femtosecond scale; in the frequency domain the modulation appears as interference lines split by h/Δt. The analysis model assumes transform-limited identical Gaussian pulses with a common energy shift, fitting each single-shot spectrum with a Gaussian envelope times a sinusoid, which yields the delay, contrast, and phase.

What would settle it

Compare the spectral fits to a direct time-domain measurement of the same pulse train—for example, an X-ray pump/X-ray probe cross-correlation or an attosecond streak-camera trace that resolves the 4.5-11.9 fs separations and the shot-to-shot arrival-time jitter. If the directly measured pulse separations deviate from the fitted delays or the measured carrier arrival-time jitter exceeds the fitted 0.1-attosecond level, the transform-limited assumption behind the quoted numbers is wrong.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a fresh-bunch self-seeded free-electron laser, with its electron beam sculpted by a slotted foil and a corrugated wakefield structure, produces a coherent sequence of hard X-ray pulses whose relative phases are stable and whose delays and phases are tunable. The demonstration is a pulse triplet at 9.7 keV: the average of thousands of single-shot spectra shows a stable interference pattern whose line spacing gives an 8.1 ± 1.0 fs neighbouring-pulse delay, and whose sinusoidal modulation phase tracks the monochromator setting over about 10π of phase. Shifting the foil position changes the slit separation and moves the delay monotonically from 4.5 to 11.9 fs. The authors measure a shot-to-shot relative phase jitter of 1.2 rad, which at 9.7 keV corresponds to 0.1 attoseconds of carrier arrival-time jitter between neighbouring pulses, and they estimate a head-pulse duration near 3.8 fs and a peak field strength of about 73 GV/cm in a focused beam.

Load-bearing premise

The spectral analysis assumes the three pulses are transform-limited, identical in rms duration, and shifted by a common photon energy, so the fitted delays, contrasts, and 0.1-attosecond phase jitter are only as good as that assumption; if the pulses are chirped or have unequal durations, the quantitative results could be biased.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Phase-locked hard X-ray pulse pairs and triplets with microjoule-level energies can now be used as the X-ray analogue of pulse sequences long available at longer wavelengths.
  • Because the relative phase is adjustable through the monochromator setting, Ramsey-type and coherent-control experiments at 9.7 keV become possible without a photon split-and-delay stage.
  • The demonstrated field strength of about 73 GV/cm when focused is close to what is needed to drive Rabi cycles of core transitions in mid-Z atoms, making hard X-ray quantum optics experiments plausible.
  • With more advanced beam shaping and diagnostics, the approach points toward a hard X-ray arbitrary waveform generator with programmable amplitude and phase.
  • Delay tunability via foil geometry should extend to sub-femtosecond separations if the electron-beam phase space before the foil is controlled.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, the same mechanism could be generalized to more than three pulses by using foils with more slots, yielding trains suitable for frequency-comb-style spectroscopy at hard X-ray energies.
  • Beyond the paper, the 0.1-attosecond phase-jitter figure is derived from spectral fits under the transform-limited assumption, so a true time-domain characterization would likely reveal additional arrival-time jitter from electron-beam energy fluctuations, making the quoted value best read as a lower bound on phase stability.
  • Beyond the paper, if the method transfers to softer X-ray energies, where core-hole lifetimes are longer, the same hardware would allow multi-pulse coherent control of inner-shell excitations with relaxed timing tolerances.
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 the experimental implementation of the PHLUX scheme at PAL-XFEL: a fresh-bunch self-seeded hard X-ray free-electron laser, combined with a slotted foil and a corrugated wakefield structure, generates a train of three coherent pulses at 9.7 keV. The central evidence is a stable interference pattern in averaged single-shot spectra, a pulse delay that scales monotonically with slit separation over 4.5-11.9 fs, and a phase scan of approximately 10 pi controlled by the monochromator angle. The paper further quotes a shot-to-shot phase jitter corresponding to 0.1 attoseconds of carrier arrival time, a head-pulse FWHM duration of 3.8 fs, and pulse energies of several tens of microjoules.

Significance. If the demonstration holds, this is an important experimental step: it extends phase-locked ultrafast pulse-sequence generation to the hard X-ray regime with microjoule-level energies and independently tunable delay and phase, with immediate relevance for coherent X-ray spectroscopy and X-ray quantum optics. The core existence claim is well supported by direct measurements: the averaged interference lines, the monotonic delay scan, and the phase scan are observed quantities rather than predictions derived from a fitted model, and the paper includes accelerator/FEL simulations and several internal cross-checks. The reported quantitative precision values, however, rest on an assumed pulse model and on a filtered dataset, so the headline numbers need robustness checks before they can be taken at face value.

major comments (3)
  1. [Methods, Eq. (2); Results, Fig. 3; Supplementary Information, Sec. 3] The phase jitter of 0.1 as and the quoted contrast and delay are extracted with Eq. (1), which is derived from the assumption in Eq. (2) that all three pulses are transform-limited, have identical rms duration sigma_t, and share a common energy shift delta_E. This assumption is not independently checked. If the pulses carry different linear chirps or unequal durations, each pulse pair contributes a different spectral-phase slope, and the fitted phi, Delta_t, and nu become weighted averages; the conversion of the fitted phase scatter into a carrier arrival-time jitter is then not unique. Please add a model-dependence analysis, for example by fitting single-shot spectra with an additional chirp parameter or with independent pulse durations, and show that the extracted phase jitter and delay are stable; alternatively, report the phase-jitter number as an upper limit under the transform-limited model.
  2. [Results (paragraph after Fig. 3); Supplementary Information, 'Single-shot spectra'] Approximately 25% of single-shot spectra are excluded from the analysis based on fit residue, implausible delay, or low amplitude. The paper itself notes that the corrugated structure increases orbit jitter, so the rejected shots are plausibly the ones with the largest phase excursions; the surviving 75% therefore constitutes a selected sample. This makes 0.1 as a lower bound rather than an unbiased jitter estimate. Please quantify the selection bias: report the jitter for different rejection thresholds, or characterize the rejected shots, and state whether the conclusion of phase locking at the attosecond-carrier level survives in the unfiltered distribution.
  3. [Results (paragraph beginning 'The separation of spectral lines shown in Figs. 2 and 3...')] The conversion of the fitted spectral-line-position jitter (0.11 eV) into 1.2 rad and then 0.1 as assumes that all scatter in the phase parameter is caused by carrier arrival time. The same paragraph reports a central-frequency jitter of 0.3 eV, attributed to monochromator angle, beam-energy, and chirp fluctuations, which is larger than the line-position jitter. Please show explicitly how the 0.11 eV line-position jitter is separated from the common-mode central-frequency jitter, since in Eq. (1) a common energy shift of the spectrum is partially absorbed by the phase parameter phi when E_0 is fixed. Without this separation the 0.1 as figure conflates carrier-phase stability with seed-energy stability.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Supplementary Information, Sec. 3] In the sentence 'Figure 8 shows 20 consecutive single-shot spectra ... and their fits to Eq. (9)', Eq. (9) is the foil-resolution formula; the fits are to Eq. (1) of the main text. Please correct the cross-reference.
  2. [Results (pulse duration) and Discussion] The head-pulse duration is quoted as 3.8 fs in the Results and as 3.4 fs in the Discussion, without derivation of the latter. Please reconcile the values or define clearly which quantity (FWHM versus rms) is being used in each place.
  3. [Methods, Eqs. (7)-(8)] The Gaussian fits to the averaged autocorrelation amplitudes have a large number of free parameters; please state the fit uncertainties on t_1 and t_2 and justify the use of Gaussian line shapes for the interference peaks rather than the functional form implied by Eq. (1).
  4. [Data availability] The data availability statement says data are available from the authors upon request; for a demonstration paper of this type, depositing the raw single-shot spectra and fit outputs in a public repository would strengthen reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation found: the phase-locking claim rests on measured interference spectra, and the fitted parameters are data extractions, not predictions implied by the model.

full rationale

The paper is an experimental implementation of a previously proposed scheme (Ref. [5]) by overlapping authors, but the load-bearing claims—tunable delay, tunable phase, and phase-locked pulse triplets—rest on directly measured interference spectra, delay scans, and monochromator-angle scans, not on the cited proposal's theoretical content. Equation (2) assumes transform-limited, equal-duration pulses to construct the fit model Eq. (1); however, the fit parameters (delay, phase, contrast, envelope) are extracted from single-shot spectra, and the phase-locking observation (persistent interference lines in the average of 2,000 spectra) is a measured property that the model does not generate by construction. The conversion of spectral-line-position jitter into 0.1 as carrier-arrival-time jitter uses the standard relation Δφ = E0 τ/ℏ and is an interpretation of fitted phase scatter, not a prediction of it. The transform-limited assumption and the ~25% shot exclusion could bias the quantitative duration and jitter estimates, but these are model-dependence and selection concerns, not circularity. The self-citation to Ref. [5] supplies the experimental geometry, not the evidence for phase stability, and the cited prior work does not itself contain the measured result; the demonstration is thus externally falsifiable.

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

The central claim rests on several fitted parameters extracted from a model that assumes transform-limited, equal-duration pulses. The experiments rely on established accelerator physics techniques (self-seeding, slotted foil, wakefield) taken as axioms, and on simulation codes (elegant, Genesis) whose validity is assumed. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • Pulse delay Δt = 8.1±1.0 fs (geometry I), 6.2-11.9 fs (geometry II scan)
    Fitted to each single-shot spectrum using Eq. (1). The central claim of tunable delay depends on these fitted values.
  • Interference phase φ = jitter 0.11 eV in line position, corresponding to 1.2 rad phase jitter
    Fitted per spectrum. The 0.1 as phase jitter claim is derived from the statistics of this fitted phase.
  • Contrast ν = 0.34±0.15
    Fitted per spectrum. Used to estimate pulse amplitude ratios and to support the three-pulse interference model.
  • Delay vs. slit separation slope = 23 fs/mm
    Linear fit to data in Fig. 4f, relating the tunable delay to foil geometry and electron beam dispersion/chirp.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The three PHLUX pulses are transform-limited with identical rms durations and a common photon energy shift
    Invoked in Methods around Eq. (2) to construct the spectral fit model. If violated, the fitted delay, contrast, and phase jitter may be biased.
  • domain assumption The corrugated wakefield structure produces a beam tilt as described by the analytical model of Ref. [54]
    Used to explain the fresh-bunch self-seeding and to justify the beam tilt. The model and the distance of 600 μm are assumed in the simulations.
  • domain assumption The slotted foil emittance spoiling degrades selected electron slices so they do not lase, with a shaping resolution r_t = 1.5 fs
    This is the basis for the three-pulse structure and the estimated pulse durations of 3.8 fs and 5.0 fs. The resolution formula (Eq. S1) uses measured parameters but the effect is not directly verified.
  • domain assumption The spectrometer resolution is a Gaussian with FWHM 0.26 eV at 9.7 keV
    Used in the spectral convolution and to derive the contrast reduction. The resolution is taken from prior calibration (Ref. [43]).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Tunable, phase-locked hard X-ray pulse sequences generated by a free-electron laser." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3A33D3NS

@misc{pith2026250800455,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Tunable, phase-locked hard X-ray pulse sequences generated by a free-electron laser},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3A33D3NS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.00455}
}
read the original abstract

The ability to arbitrarily dial in amplitudes and phases enables the fundamental quantum state operations pioneered for microwaves and then infrared and visible wavelengths during the second half of the last century. Self-seeded X-ray free-electron lasers (FELs) routinely generate coherent, high-brightness, and ultrafast pulses for a wide range of experiments, but have so far not achieved a comparable level of amplitude and phase control. Here we report the first tunable phase-locked, ultra-fast hard X-ray (PHLUX) pulses by implementing a recently proposed method: A fresh-bunch self-seeded FEL, driven by an electron beam that was shaped with a slotted foil and a corrugated wakefield structure, generates coherent radiation that is intensity-modulated on the femtosecond time scale. We measure phase-locked (to within a shot-to-shot phase jitter corresponding to 0.1 attoseconds) pulse triplets with a photon energy of 9.7 keV, a pulse energy of several tens of microjoules, a freely tunable relative phase, and a pulse delay tunability between 4.5 and 11.9 fs. Such pulse sequences are suitable for a wide range of applications, including coherent spectroscopy, and have amplitudes sufficient to enable hard X-ray quantum optics experiments. More generally, these results represent an important step towards a hard X-ray arbitrary waveform generator.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Phase-Programmable Free Electron Quantum States in Synthetic Momentum Space

    quant-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Phase-only Pontryagin optimization and deterministic Bragg-regime sequential coupling enable programmable free electron momentum-sideband populations and coherent superposition states with tunable relative phases.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 59 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Kawashima, M

    H. Kawashima, M. M. Wefers, and K. A. Nelson, Fem- tosecond pulse shaping, multiple-pulse spectroscopy, and optical control, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem.46, 627 (1995)

    work page 1995

  2. [2]

    Krausz and M

    F. Krausz and M. Ivanov, Attosecond physics, Rev. Mod. Phys.81, 163 (2009)

    2009

  3. [3]

    S. T. Cundiff and A. M. Weiner, Optical arbitrary wave- form generation, Nat. Photon.4, 760 (2010)

    work page 2010

  4. [4]

    Geloni, Self-seeded free-electron lasers, inSynchrotron Light Sources and Free-Electron Lasers(Springer Inter- national Publishing, 2016) pp

    G. Geloni, Self-seeded free-electron lasers, inSynchrotron Light Sources and Free-Electron Lasers(Springer Inter- national Publishing, 2016) pp. 161–193

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    Reicheet al., A perfect X-ray beam splitter and its applications to time-domain interferometry and quantum optics exploiting free-electron lasers, Proc

    S. Reicheet al., A perfect X-ray beam splitter and its applications to time-domain interferometry and quantum optics exploiting free-electron lasers, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.119, e2117906119 (2022)

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    Emmaet al., Experimental demonstration of fresh bunch self-seeding in an X-ray free electron laser, Appl

    C. Emmaet al., Experimental demonstration of fresh bunch self-seeding in an X-ray free electron laser, Appl. Phys. Lett.110, 154101 (2017)

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    Emmaet al., Femtosecond and subfemtosecond X-ray pulses from a self-amplified spontaneous-emission–based free-electron laser, Phys

    P. Emmaet al., Femtosecond and subfemtosecond X-ray pulses from a self-amplified spontaneous-emission–based free-electron laser, Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 074801 (2004)

    work page 2004

  8. [8]

    Emmaet al., Experimental demonstration of energy- chirp control in relativistic electron bunches using a cor- rugated pipe, Phys

    P. Emmaet al., Experimental demonstration of energy- chirp control in relativistic electron bunches using a cor- rugated pipe, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 034801 (2014)

    work page 2014

Show all 61 references
  1. [9]

    Ippenet al., Passive mode locking of the cw dye laser, Appl

    E. Ippenet al., Passive mode locking of the cw dye laser, Appl. Phys. Lett.21, 348 (1972)

    1972

  2. [10]

    Beckeret al., Harmonic mode locking of the Nd:YAG laser, IEEE J

    M. Beckeret al., Harmonic mode locking of the Nd:YAG laser, IEEE J. Quantum Electron.8, 687 (1972)

    1972

  3. [11]

    Keller,Ultrafast Lasers: A Comprehensive Introduc- tion to Fundamental Principles with Practical Applica- tions, Graduate Texts in Physics (Springer International Publishing, 2022)

    U. Keller,Ultrafast Lasers: A Comprehensive Introduc- tion to Fundamental Principles with Practical Applica- tions, Graduate Texts in Physics (Springer International Publishing, 2022)

    2022

  4. [12]

    J. J. Macklinet al., High-order harmonic generation us- ing intense femtosecond pulses, Phys. Rev. Lett.70, 766 (1993)

    1993

  5. [13]

    Pupezaet al., Extreme-ultraviolet frequency combs for precision metrology and attosecond science, Nat

    I. Pupezaet al., Extreme-ultraviolet frequency combs for precision metrology and attosecond science, Nat. Photon. 15, 175 (2021)

    2021

  6. [14]

    Zhanget al., Generation of intense phase-stable fem- tosecond hard X-ray pulse pairs, Proc

    Y. Zhanget al., Generation of intense phase-stable fem- tosecond hard X-ray pulse pairs, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.119, e2119616119 (2022)

    2022

  7. [15]

    N. F. Ramsey, A molecular beam resonance method with separated oscillating fields, Phys. Rev.78, 695 (1950)

    1950

  8. [16]

    Morgenweget al., Ramsey-comb spectroscopy with in- tense ultrashort laser pulses, Nat

    J. Morgenweget al., Ramsey-comb spectroscopy with in- tense ultrashort laser pulses, Nat. Phys.10, 30 (2014)

    2014

  9. [17]

    Wituscheket al., Tracking attosecond electronic co- herences using phase-manipulated extreme ultraviolet pulses, Nat

    A. Wituscheket al., Tracking attosecond electronic co- herences using phase-manipulated extreme ultraviolet pulses, Nat. Commun.11(2019)

    2019

  10. [18]

    Spangenberg, P

    D. Spangenberg, P. Neethling, E. Rohwer, M. H. Br¨ ugmann, and T. Feurer, Time-domain ptychography, Phys. Rev. A91, 021803 (2015)

    2015

  11. [19]

    P. M. Paulet al., Observation of a train of attosecond pulses from high harmonic generation, Science292, 1689 (2001)

    2001

  12. [20]

    P. K. Marojuet al., Attosecond pulse shaping using a seeded free-electron laser, Nature578, 386 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    P. K. Marojuet al., Attosecond coherent control of elec- tronic wave packets in two-colour photoionization using a novel timing tool for seeded free-electron laser, Nat. Photon.17, 200 (2023)

    2023

  14. [22]

    Greenlandet al., Coherent control of Rydberg states in silicon, Nature465, 1057—1061 (2010)

    P. Greenlandet al., Coherent control of Rydberg states in silicon, Nature465, 1057—1061 (2010)

    2010

  15. [23]

    Nandiet al., Observation of Rabi dynamics with a short-wavelength free-electron laser, Nature608, 488 (2022)

    S. Nandiet al., Observation of Rabi dynamics with a short-wavelength free-electron laser, Nature608, 488 (2022)

    2022

  16. [24]

    Nandiet al., Generation of entanglement using a short-wavelength seeded free-electron laser, Sci

    S. Nandiet al., Generation of entanglement using a short-wavelength seeded free-electron laser, Sci. Adv.10, eado0668 (2024)

    2024

  17. [25]

    St¨ ohr and A

    J. St¨ ohr and A. Scherz, Creation of X-ray transparency of matter by stimulated elastic forward scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 107402 (2015)

    2015

  18. [26]

    Wuet al., Elimination of X-ray diffraction through stimulated X-ray transmission, Phys

    B. Wuet al., Elimination of X-ray diffraction through stimulated X-ray transmission, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 027401 (2016)

    2016

  19. [27]

    Chenet al., Ultrafast self-induced X-ray transparency and loss of magnetic diffraction, Phys

    Z. Chenet al., Ultrafast self-induced X-ray transparency and loss of magnetic diffraction, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 137403 (2018)

    2018

  20. [28]

    Pellegriniet al., The physics of X-ray free-electron lasers, Rev

    C. Pellegriniet al., The physics of X-ray free-electron lasers, Rev. Mod. Phys.88, 015006 (2016). 9

    2016

  21. [29]

    E. A. Seddonet al., Short-wavelength free-electron laser sources and science: a review, Rep. Prog. Phys.80, 115901 (2017)

    2017

  22. [30]

    Huang, H

    N. Huang, H. Deng, B. Liu, D. Wang, and Z. Zhao, Fea- tures and futures of X-ray free-electron lasers, The Inno- vation2, 100097 (2021)

    2021

  23. [31]

    Gauthieret al., Generation of phase-locked pulses from a seeded free-electron laser, Phys

    D. Gauthieret al., Generation of phase-locked pulses from a seeded free-electron laser, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 024801 (2016)

    2016

  24. [32]

    R. R. Robleset al., Spectrotemporal shaping of attosec- ond X-ray pulses with a fresh-slice free-electron laser, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 115001 (2025)

    2025

  25. [33]

    N. R. Thompson and B. W. J. McNeil, Mode locking in a free-electron laser amplifier, Physics Review Letters100, 203901 (2008)

    2008

  26. [34]

    Pratet al., An X-ray free-electron laser with a highly configurable undulator and integrated chicanes for tai- lored pulse properties, Nat

    E. Pratet al., An X-ray free-electron laser with a highly configurable undulator and integrated chicanes for tai- lored pulse properties, Nat. Commun.14(2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    Pratet al., Experimental demonstration of mode- coupled and high-brightness self-amplified spontaneous emission in an X-ray free-electron laser, Phys

    E. Pratet al., Experimental demonstration of mode- coupled and high-brightness self-amplified spontaneous emission in an X-ray free-electron laser, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 205001 (2024)

    2024

  28. [36]

    Feldhauset al., Possible application of X-ray optical elements for reducing the spectral bandwidth of an X-ray SASE FEL, Opt

    J. Feldhauset al., Possible application of X-ray optical elements for reducing the spectral bandwidth of an X-ray SASE FEL, Opt. Commun.140, 341 (1997)

    1997

  29. [37]

    Geloniet al., A novel self-seeding scheme for hard X-ray FELs, J

    G. Geloniet al., A novel self-seeding scheme for hard X-ray FELs, J. Mod. Opt.58, 1391 (2011)

    2011

  30. [38]

    Amannet al., Demonstration of self-seeding in a hard- X-ray free-electron laser, Nat

    J. Amannet al., Demonstration of self-seeding in a hard- X-ray free-electron laser, Nat. Photon.6, 693 (2012)

    2012

  31. [39]

    Ratneret al., Experimental demonstration of a soft X- ray self-seeded free-electron laser, Phys

    D. Ratneret al., Experimental demonstration of a soft X- ray self-seeded free-electron laser, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 054801 (2015)

    2015

  32. [40]

    Liuet al., Cascaded hard X-ray self-seeded free- electron laser at megahertz repetition rate, Nat

    S. Liuet al., Cascaded hard X-ray self-seeded free- electron laser at megahertz repetition rate, Nat. Photon. 17, 984 (2023)

    2023

  33. [41]

    Dijkstalet al., Demonstration of two-color X-ray free- electron laser pulses with a sextupole magnet, Phys

    P. Dijkstalet al., Demonstration of two-color X-ray free- electron laser pulses with a sextupole magnet, Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams23, 030703 (2020)

    2020

  34. [42]

    Kanget al., Hard X-ray free-electron laser with femtosecond-scale timing jitter, Nat

    H.-S. Kanget al., Hard X-ray free-electron laser with femtosecond-scale timing jitter, Nat. Photon.11, 708 (2017)

    2017

  35. [43]

    Kimet al., Hard X-ray single-shot spectrometer of PAL-XFEL, J

    S. Kimet al., Hard X-ray single-shot spectrometer of PAL-XFEL, J. Synchrotron Radiat.32(2025)

    2025

  36. [44]

    Namet al., High-brightness self-seeded X-ray free- electron laser covering the 3.5 kev to 14.6 kev range, Nat

    I. Namet al., High-brightness self-seeded X-ray free- electron laser covering the 3.5 kev to 14.6 kev range, Nat. Photon.15, 435 (2021)

    2021

  37. [45]

    R. R. Lindberg and Y. V. Shvyd’ko, Time dependence of bragg forward scattering and self-seeding of hard X- ray free-electron lasers, Phys. Rev. ST Accel. Beams15, 050706 (2012)

    2012

  38. [46]

    Minet al., Hard X-ray self-seeding commissioning at PAL-XFEL, J

    C.-K. Minet al., Hard X-ray self-seeding commissioning at PAL-XFEL, J. Synchrotron Rad.26, 1101 (2019)

    2019

  39. [47]

    Inoueet al., Generation of narrow-band X-ray free- electron laser via reflection self-seeding, Nat

    I. Inoueet al., Generation of narrow-band X-ray free- electron laser via reflection self-seeding, Nat. Photon.13, 319 (2019)

    2019

  40. [48]

    Longet al., Control of bandwidth and signal-to-noise ratio for hard-x-ray self-seeded free-electron lasers, Phys

    T. Longet al., Control of bandwidth and signal-to-noise ratio for hard-x-ray self-seeded free-electron lasers, Phys. Rev. Appl.23, 044038 (2025)

    2025

  41. [49]

    J. B. Hastings, L. Rivkin, and G. Aeppli, Present and future accelerator-based X-ray sources: A perspective, Rev. Accel. Sci. Tech.10, 33 (2019)

    2019

  42. [50]

    Kimet al., Development of the nanobeam X-ray exper- iments instrument at PAL-XFEL, J

    J. Kimet al., Development of the nanobeam X-ray exper- iments instrument at PAL-XFEL, J. Synchrotron Radiat. 32, 466 (2025)

    2025

  43. [51]

    Hartmannet al., Attosecond time–energy structure of X-ray free-electron laser pulses, Nat

    N. Hartmannet al., Attosecond time–energy structure of X-ray free-electron laser pulses, Nat. Photon.12, 215 (2018)

    2018

  44. [52]

    Cesaret al., Electron beam shaping via laser heater temporal shaping, Phys

    D. Cesaret al., Electron beam shaping via laser heater temporal shaping, Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams24, 110703 (2021)

    2021

  45. [53]

    Kanget al., FEL performance achieved at PAL- XFEL using a three-chicane bunch compression scheme, J

    H.-S. Kanget al., FEL performance achieved at PAL- XFEL using a three-chicane bunch compression scheme, J. Synchrotron Radiat.26, 1127 (2019)

    2019

  46. [54]

    Baneet al., Analytical formulas for short bunch wakes in a flat dechirper, Phys

    K. Baneet al., Analytical formulas for short bunch wakes in a flat dechirper, Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams19, 084401 (2016)

    2016

  47. [55]

    J. W. Goodman,Statistical optics(John Wiley & Sons, 2000)

    2000

  48. [56]

    Loos, Operational experience at LCLS, inProc

    H. Loos, Operational experience at LCLS, inProc. FEL’11(JACoW, 2011) pp. 166–172

    2011

  49. [57]

    Borland,elegant: A Flexible SDDS-Compliant Code for Accelerator Simulation, Tech

    M. Borland,elegant: A Flexible SDDS-Compliant Code for Accelerator Simulation, Tech. Rep. LS-287 (Argonne National Laboratory, 2000)

    2000

  50. [58]

    Reiche, GENESIS 1.3: a fully 3D time-dependent FEL simulation code, Nucl

    S. Reiche, GENESIS 1.3: a fully 3D time-dependent FEL simulation code, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 429, 243 (1999). 10 SUPPLEMENT AR Y INFORMA TION

    1999

  51. [59]

    At PAL-XFEL, the gain curve is measured by recording the final electron beam energy while disabling the FEL process at various points along the undulator beamline [56], i.e

    Measured and simulated gain curve The gain curve describes the growth of the FEL pulse energy along the undulator beamline. At PAL-XFEL, the gain curve is measured by recording the final electron beam energy while disabling the FEL process at various points along the undulator...

  52. [60]

    Thus, the current profile of the unspoiled FIG

    Duration of the unspoiled electron distribution after the slotted foil The transverse divergence of particles hitting the slot- ted foil is greatly increased, preventing them from con- tributing to the FEL emission in the downstream undu- lator section. Thus, the current profi...

  53. [61]

    (9), from the mea- surement shown in Figs

    Single-shot spectra Figure 8 shows 20 consecutive single-shot spectra out of 2,000 total, and their fits to Eq. (9), from the mea- surement shown in Figs. 2,3 of the main text. We ex- clude 25% of all spectra from further analysis, based on a too large fit residue, an implausi...

Pith tools

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