pith. sign in

arxiv: 2509.14802 · v4 · submitted 2025-09-18 · ⚛️ physics.optics

Ultrafast optically induced tunneling in narrow metallic gaps from the time dependent density functional perspective

Boyang Ma , Antton Babaze , Michael Kr\"uger , Javier Aizpurua , Andrei G. Borisov This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 16:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.optics
keywords ultrafast tunnelingmetallic gapstime-dependent density functional theoryphoton-assisted tunnelingoptical field emissiondc biasoptical pulsesnanooptics
0
0 comments X

The pith

TDDFT calculations retrieve experimental currents for optically induced tunneling in narrow metallic gaps without parameters.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper uses time-dependent density functional theory to simulate electron tunneling across narrow gaps between metals when driven by single-cycle or few-cycle optical pulses. It distinguishes photon-assisted tunneling, where electrons absorb one or more photons to cross the barrier, from direct optical field emission that dominates at higher intensities. The simulations track how the tunneling barrier shape, applied dc bias, and optical field strength control the transition between these regimes. Numerical results are cross-checked against an analytical strong-field model, and the parameter-free outputs reproduce measured transport data from recent biased-gap experiments.

Core claim

Using time-dependent density functional theory, the authors demonstrate that short optical pulses trigger electron tunneling in narrow metallic gaps through photon-assisted mechanisms with one-photon, two-photon, and higher-order absorption at weak fields, transitioning to optical field emission at strong fields. The approach accounts for the tunneling barrier, applied bias, and field strength, with single-electron calculations and an analytical strong-field theory model providing supporting insights. The parameter-free TDDFT results retrieve and explain recent experimental observations of optically induced transport under dc bias.

What carries the argument

Time-dependent density functional theory applied to the metallic gap geometry, which computes the time-dependent electron density and resulting tunneling currents under optical fields to identify photon-assisted orders.

If this is right

  • At weak optical fields, tunneling currents show signatures of one-photon or two-photon absorption processes.
  • An applied dc bias shifts the effective barrier and increases the overall optically induced transport.
  • Stronger optical fields drive a transition to optical field emission that bypasses photon-order dependence.
  • The analytical strong-field model reproduces key TDDFT trends and isolates the role of the tunneling barrier.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same framework could be used to predict how gap width or metal choice alters the intensity threshold for the tunneling-to-field-emission crossover.
  • Extension to structured electrodes might allow design of light-gated nanoscale switches that operate at optical frequencies without material-specific fitting.
  • Discrepancies at very high fields could highlight where current TDDFT functionals miss multi-electron or relativistic corrections in the gap.

Load-bearing premise

The time-dependent density functional theory accurately captures the work function, dielectric response, and geometry of the metallic gaps so that no empirical scaling or fitting is needed to match currents.

What would settle it

A clear mismatch between the TDDFT-predicted dependence of tunneling current on optical field strength or photon order and the measured currents in narrow gaps under single-cycle pulses plus dc bias.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.14802 by Andrei G. Borisov, Antton Babaze, Boyang Ma, Javier Aizpurua, Michael Kr\"uger.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Sketch of the processes behind the electron transport in the gap under different conditions. The potential of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Sketch of the studied system. Cross section ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Sketch of the electron transport described by the SFT. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Electron transfer induced by a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Model 1D WPP study of electron transfer induced [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Effect of an applied bias on electron transfer induced by a single-cycle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Same as in Figure 6a, but for a 2 nm wide junction. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Model 1D WPP study of the optically induced electron transfer between metal leads separated by a 1 nm vacuum gap. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Effect of an applied dc bias on electron transfer in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Effect of the work function Φ, gap size [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Effect of an applied bias on optically induced [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Effect of an applied bias [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_12.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In this work, using the time-dependent density functional theory, we address the electron tunneling triggered by short (single-cycle and several-cycle) optical pulses in narrow metallic gaps under conditions relevant for actual experiments. We identify photon-assisted tunneling with one-photon, two-photon, and higher-order photon absorption, and we discuss the effect of the tunneling barrier, applied bias, and strength of the optical field on transition from photon-assisted tunneling (weak optical fields) to the optical field emission at strong optical fields. The numerical single-electron calculations and an analytical strong-field theory model are used to gain deeper insights into the results of the time-dependent density functional theory calculations. Additionally, our parameter-free calculations allow us to retrieve and explain recent experimental results on optically induced transport in narrow metallic gaps under an applied dc bias.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript applies time-dependent density functional theory (TDDFT) to model ultrafast electron tunneling through narrow metallic gaps driven by single-cycle and few-cycle optical pulses. It distinguishes photon-assisted tunneling (one-photon, two-photon, and higher-order processes) from optical field emission, examines the roles of barrier height, applied dc bias, and optical-field strength in the transition between regimes, and supplements the TDDFT results with single-electron numerical calculations and an analytical strong-field theory model. The central claim is that these calculations are parameter-free and directly retrieve and explain recent experimental measurements of optically induced transport under bias.

Significance. If the parameter-free claim holds, the work would be significant for establishing a first-principles route to quantitative prediction of ultrafast tunneling currents in nano-gaps without empirical scaling. The combination of TDDFT numerics, single-electron analysis, and analytical modeling provides multiple cross-checks on the identified regimes. The direct retrieval of experimental data is a notable strength that distinguishes the manuscript from purely phenomenological treatments.

major comments (1)
  1. [§4] §4 (comparison with experiment): the manuscript states that the TDDFT currents are obtained with first-principles inputs for geometry, work function, and dielectric response and match measured values without adjustment. However, the precise numerical values adopted for gap separation and the exchange-correlation functional are not tabulated alongside the experimental parameters; this information is load-bearing for the parameter-free assertion and should be added explicitly.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Figure 2] Figure 2: the color scale for the time-dependent current density is not labeled with units, making quantitative comparison to the analytical model difficult.
  2. [§3.2] The transition criterion between photon-assisted tunneling and field emission is described qualitatively in the text but lacks an explicit threshold (e.g., in terms of Keldysh parameter or field strength) that could be used to demarcate the regimes in the figures.
  3. [§3.3] A few typographical inconsistencies appear in the notation for the vector potential (A(t) vs. A_0 sin(ωt)) between the analytical model and the TDDFT implementation.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the positive recommendation for minor revision. The single major comment is constructive and we address it directly below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4] §4 (comparison with experiment): the manuscript states that the TDDFT currents are obtained with first-principles inputs for geometry, work function, and dielectric response and match measured values without adjustment. However, the precise numerical values adopted for gap separation and the exchange-correlation functional are not tabulated alongside the experimental parameters; this information is load-bearing for the parameter-free assertion and should be added explicitly.

    Authors: We agree with the referee that the parameter-free character of the comparison would be more transparent if the exact numerical inputs were tabulated. In the revised manuscript we will add a new table (or expanded paragraph) in §4 that lists, side-by-side with the experimental parameters, the precise values used in the TDDFT runs: the gap separation (taken from the experimental geometry), the exchange-correlation functional (PBE), the work-function value obtained from the same DFT calculation, and the dielectric-response model. These quantities are not adjusted to fit the measured currents; they are either taken directly from the experimental setup or computed ab initio. The added table will make the absence of empirical scaling explicit and will strengthen the central claim of the paper. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: parameter-free TDDFT derivation remains independent of fitted inputs

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain relies on time-dependent density functional theory (TDDFT) computations for electron tunneling in metallic gaps, supplemented by single-electron numerical calculations and an analytical strong-field model. The central claim states that these are 'parameter-free calculations' that 'retrieve and explain recent experimental results' using first-principles inputs for geometry, bias, and optical field. No quoted equations or steps reduce a prediction to a fitted parameter by construction, nor do self-citations bear the load of uniqueness or ansatz smuggling. The agreement with experiment is presented as an external benchmark rather than a tautological output. This qualifies as a self-contained first-principles result with no circular reduction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work relies on standard TDDFT approximations for electron dynamics in metals and the validity of the jellium or similar model for the gap; no free parameters are introduced according to the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Time-dependent density functional theory provides an accurate description of electron tunneling dynamics in metallic nanostructures under optical driving.
    Invoked throughout the abstract as the primary computational method whose results are taken to be reliable.
  • domain assumption The strong-field analytical model correctly captures the transition from photon-assisted to field-emission tunneling.
    Used to gain insight into the TDDFT results.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5679 in / 1183 out tokens · 40164 ms · 2026-05-18T16:28:22.849331+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

123 extracted references · 123 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    V/nm × 0.05 1ℏ𝜔𝜔 2ℏ𝜔𝜔 3ℏ𝜔𝜔 4ℏ𝜔𝜔 1ℏ𝜔𝜔 2ℏ𝜔𝜔 3ℏ𝜔𝜔 4ℏ𝜔𝜔 5ℏ𝜔𝜔 3ℏ𝜔𝜔 5ℏ𝜔𝜔 6ℏ𝜔𝜔 12ℏ𝜔𝜔 c) d) e) 1.7 V/nm 2.0 V/nm 2.2 V/nm 2.5 V/nm 4ℏ𝜔𝜔0.7 V/nm 1.0 V/nm 1.2 V/nm 1.4 V/nm 1.7 V/nm 0 energy distribution (arb.u.) x (Å) 0 10 20 30 40 7ℏ𝜔𝜔 x (Å) -10 -5 0 5 10 potential 𝓔𝓔𝑭𝑭 -300 0 300-20 0 20 x (Å) t (fs) electron energy, ℰ (eV) electron energy, ℰ (eV) electron energ...

    work page

  2. [2]

    The difference in photon energies ex- plains the difference between the effective photon orders nobtained in the two sets of results

    is used here, while the results in Figure 6a are obtained withω= 0.95 eV. The difference in photon energies ex- plains the difference between the effective photon orders nobtained in the two sets of results. In line with experimental findings [5], for an applied bias ofU= 3 V we find that:

    work page

  3. [3]

    The optically assisted electron tunneling withℓ= 1 photon absorption at lowE g evolves into a multi- photon regime with effective photon ordern= 2 as Eg increases

    work page

  4. [4]

    Wenowturntoregression, i.e

    No higher nonlinearityn >2 is observed over a wide range of optical field strengths in the gap up to the onset of the optical field emission regime that we calculate here atE g ≈12 V/nm (not shown). According to the SFT, TDDFT and model WPP calcula- tions performed in section III (see Figure 8), the second finding implies that while severalℓ-channels (pho...

    work page doi:10.13039/501100011033 2020

  5. [5]

    Yoshida, H

    S. Yoshida, H. Hirori, T. Tachizaki, K. Yoshioka, Y. Arashida, Z.-H. Wang, Y. Sanari, O. Takeuchi, Y. Kanemitsu, and H. Shigekawa, ACS Photonics6, 1356 (2019)

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Arashida, H

    Y. Arashida, H. Mogi, M. Ishikawa, I. Igarashi, A. Hatanaka, N. Umeda, J. Peng, S. Yoshida, O. Takeuchi, and H. Shigekawa, ACS Photonics9, 3156 (2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    S. Liu, A. Hammud, I. Hamada, M. Wolf, M. M¨ uller, and T. Kumagai, Science Advances8, eabq5682 (2022)

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    M. Garg, A. Martin-Jimenez, M. Pisarra, Y. Luo, F. Mart´ ın, and K. Kern, Nature Photonics16, 196 (2022)

    work page 2022

  9. [9]

    Y. Luo, F. Neubrech, A. Martin-Jimenez, N. Liu, K. Kern, and M. Garg, Nature Communications15, 1316 (2024)

    work page 2024

  10. [10]

    Y. Luo, S. Sheng, A. Schirato, A. Martin-Jimenez, G. Della Valle, G. Cerullo, K. Kern, and M. Garg, Na- ture Communications16, 4999 (2025)

    work page 2025

  11. [11]

    Maier, R

    S. Maier, R. Spachtholz, K. Gl¨ ockl, C. M. Bustamante, S. Lingl, M. Maczejka, J. Sch¨ on, F. J. Giessibl, F. P. Bonaf´ e, M. A. Huber, A. Rubio, J. Repp, and R. Huber, Attosecond charge transfer in atomic-resolution scan- ning tunnelling microscopy (2025), arXiv:2507.10206 [physics.optics]

    work page arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Dombi, Z

    P. Dombi, Z. P´ apa, J. Vogelsang, S. V. Yalunin, M. Sivis, G. Herink, S. Sch¨ afer, P. Groß, C. Ropers, and C. Lienau, Rev. Mod. Phys.92, 025003 (2020)

    work page 2020

  13. [13]

    M¨ uller, Progress in Surface Science99, 100727 (2024)

    M. M¨ uller, Progress in Surface Science99, 100727 (2024)

    work page 2024

  14. [14]

    Vogelsang, A

    J. Vogelsang, A. Mikkelsen, C. Ropers, J. H. Gaida, M. Garg, K. Kern, J. Miao, M. Schultze, and M. Os- siander, Europhysics Letters149, 36001 (2025)

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    Z. Zhao, V. Kravtsov, Z. Wang, Z. Zhou, L. Dou, D. Huang, Z. Wang, X. Cheng, M. B. Raschke, and T. Jiang, eLight5, 1 (2025)

    work page 2025

  16. [16]

    T. L. Cocker, V. Jelic, M. Gupta, S. J. Molesky, J. A. J. Burgess, G. De Los Reyes, L. V. Titova, Y. Y. Tsui, M. R. Freeman, and F. A. Hegmann, Nature Photonics 7, 620 (2013)

    work page 2013

  17. [17]

    Yoshioka, I

    K. Yoshioka, I. Katayama, Y. Minami, M. Kitajima, S. Yoshida, H. Shigekawa, and J. Takeda, Nature Pho- tonics10, 762 (2016)

    work page 2016

  18. [18]

    T. L. Cocker, D. Peller, P. Yu, J. Repp, and R. Huber, Nature539, 263 (2016)

    work page 2016

  19. [19]

    Roelcke, L

    C. Roelcke, L. Z. Kastner, M. Graml, A. Biereder, J. Wilhelm, J. Repp, R. Huber, and Y. A. Gerasimenko, Nature Photonics18, 595 (2024)

    work page 2024

  20. [20]

    Jelic, S

    V. Jelic, S. Adams, M. Hassan, K. Cleland-Host, S. E. Ammerman, and T. L. Cocker, Nature Photonics18, 898 (2024)

    work page 2024

  21. [21]

    Sheng, S

    S. Sheng, S. Abdo, Mohamad nad Rolf-Pissarczyk, K. Lichtenberg, S. Baumann, J. A. J. Burgess, L. Mala- volti, and S. Loth, Nature Physics20, 1603 (2024)

    work page 2024

  22. [22]

    Schattke and M

    W. Schattke and M. A. Van Hove,Solid-state photoemis- sion and related methods: theory and experiment(John Wiley & Sons, 2003)

    work page 2003

  23. [23]

    D¸ abrowski, Y

    M. D¸ abrowski, Y. Dai, and H. Petek, Chemical Reviews 120, 6247 (2020)

    work page 2020

  24. [24]

    Bauer, A

    M. Bauer, A. Marienfeld, and M. Aeschlimann, Progress in Surface Science90, 319 (2015)

    work page 2015

  25. [25]

    Lemell, X.-M

    C. Lemell, X.-M. Tong, F. Krausz, and J. Burgd¨ orfer, Phys. Rev. Lett.90, 076403 (2003)

    work page 2003

  26. [26]

    Ropers, D

    C. Ropers, D. R. Solli, C. P. Schulz, C. Lienau, and 25 T. Elsaesser, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 043907 (2007)

    work page 2007

  27. [27]

    Bormann, M

    R. Bormann, M. Gulde, A. Weismann, S. V. Yalunin, and C. Ropers, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 147601 (2010)

    work page 2010

  28. [28]

    Kr¨ uger, M

    M. Kr¨ uger, M. Schenk, P. Hommelhoff, G. Wachter, C. Lemell, and J. Burgd¨ orfer, New Journal of Physics 14, 085019 (2012)

    work page 2012

  29. [29]

    D. J. Park, B. Piglosiewicz, S. Schmidt, H. Kollmann, M. Mascheck, and C. Lienau, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 244803 (2012)

    work page 2012

  30. [30]

    Dombi, A

    P. Dombi, A. H¨ orl, P. R´ acz, I. M´ arton, A. Tr¨ ugler, J. R. Krenn, and U. Hohenester, Nano Letters13, 674 (2013)

    work page 2013

  31. [31]

    Passig, S

    J. Passig, S. Zherebtsov, R. Irsig, M. Arbeiter, C. Peltz, S. G¨ ode, S. Skruszewicz, K.-H. Meiwes-Broer, J. Tiggesb¨ aumker, M. F. Kling, and T. Fennel, Nature Communications8, 1181 (2017)

    work page 2017

  32. [32]

    Kr¨ uger, C

    M. Kr¨ uger, C. Lemell, G. Wachter, J. Burgd¨ orfer, and P. Hommelhoff, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics51, 172001 (2018)

    work page 2018

  33. [33]

    P. D. Keathley, W. P. Putnam, P. Vasireddy, R. G. Hobbs, Y. Yang, K. K. Berggren, and F. X. K¨ artner, Nature Physics15, 1128 (2019)

    work page 2019

  34. [34]

    M. F. Ciappina, J. A. P´ erez-Hern´ andez, A. S. Lands- man, W. A. Okell, S. Zherebtsov, B. F¨ org, J. Sch¨ otz, L. Seiffert, T. Fennel, T. Shaaran, T. Zimmermann, A. Chac´ on, R. Guichard, A. Za¨ ır, J. W. G. Tisch, J. P. Marangos, T. Witting, A. Braun, S. A. Maier, L. Roso, M. Kr¨ uger, P. Hommelhoff, M. F. Kling, F. Krausz, and M. Lewenstein, Reports o...

    work page 2017

  35. [35]

    Dienstbier, L

    P. Dienstbier, L. Seiffert, T. Paschen, A. Liehl, A. Leit- enstorfer, T. Fennel, and P. Hommelhoff, Nature616, 702 (2023)

    work page 2023

  36. [36]

    Heide, P

    C. Heide, P. D. Keathley, and M. F. Kling, Nature Re- views Physics 10.1038/s42254-024-00764-7 (2024)

    work page doi:10.1038/s42254-024-00764-7 2024

  37. [37]

    B¨ uttiker and R

    M. B¨ uttiker and R. Landauer, Phys. Rev. Lett.49, 1739 (1982)

    work page 1982

  38. [38]

    M. H. Pedersen and M. B¨ uttiker, Phys. Rev. B58, 12993 (1998)

    work page 1998

  39. [39]

    P. K. Tien and J. P. Gordon, Phys. Rev.129, 647 (1963)

    work page 1963

  40. [40]

    J. R. Tucker and M. J. Feldman, Reviews of Modern Physics57, 1055 (1985)

    work page 1985

  41. [41]

    Platero and R

    G. Platero and R. Aguado, Physics Reports395, 1 (2004)

    work page 2004

  42. [42]

    Kohler, J

    S. Kohler, J. Lehmann, and P. H¨ anggi, Physics Reports 406, 379 (2005)

    work page 2005

  43. [43]

    Yanagisawa, C

    H. Yanagisawa, C. Hafner, P. Don´ a, M. Kl¨ ockner, D. Leuenberger, T. Greber, M. Hengsberger, and J. Os- terwalder, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 257603 (2009)

    work page 2009

  44. [44]

    Schr¨ oder, O

    B. Schr¨ oder, O. Bunjes, L. Wimmer, K. Kaiser, G. A. Traeger, T. Kotzott, C. Ropers, and M. Wenderoth, New Journal of Physics22, 033047 (2020)

    work page 2020

  45. [45]

    C. Lin, F. Krecinic, H. Yoshino, A. Hammud, A. Pan, M. Wolf, M. M¨ uller, and T. Kumagai, ACS Photonics 10, 3637 (2023)

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    Mart´ ın Saban´ es, F

    N. Mart´ ın Saban´ es, F. Krecinic, T. Kumagai, F. Schulz, M. Wolf, and M. M¨ uller, ACS Nano16, 14479 (2022)

    work page 2022

  47. [47]

    Tagliabue, A

    G. Tagliabue, A. S. Jermyn, R. Sundararaman, A. J. Welch, J. S. DuChene, R. Pala, A. R. Davoyan, P. Narang, and H. A. Atwater, Nature Communications 9, 3394 (2018)

    work page 2018

  48. [48]

    Dubi and Y

    Y. Dubi and Y. Sivan, Light: Science and Applications 8, 89 (2019)

    work page 2019

  49. [49]

    Schirato, M

    A. Schirato, M. Maiuri, G. Cerullo, and G. D. Valle, Nanophotonics12, 1 (2023)

    work page 2023

  50. [50]

    Khurgin, A

    J. Khurgin, A. Y. Bykov, and A. V. Zayats, eLight4, 15 (2024)

    work page 2024

  51. [51]

    Kiani, A

    F. Kiani, A. R. Bowman, M. Sabzehparvar, R. Sun- dararaman, and G. Tagliabue, Nano Letters24, 16008 (2024)

    work page 2024

  52. [52]

    Stefancu, N

    A. Stefancu, N. J. Halas, P. Nordlander, and E. Cortes, Nature Physics20, 1065 (2024)

    work page 2024

  53. [53]

    Garg and K

    M. Garg and K. Kern, Science367, 411 (2020)

    work page 2020

  54. [54]

    Clocking and controlling attosecond currents in a scanning tunnelling microscope

    D. Davidovich, B. Ma, A. Goldner, S. Cohen, Z. Chen, and M. Kr¨ uger, Clocking and controlling attosecond currents in a scanning tunnelling microscope (2025), arXiv:2507.10252 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  55. [55]

    F¨ orster, T

    M. F¨ orster, T. Paschen, M. Kr¨ uger, C. Lemell, G. Wachter, F. Libisch, T. Madlener, J. Burgd¨ orfer, and P. Hommelhoff, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 217601 (2016)

    work page 2016

  56. [56]

    Paschen, M

    T. Paschen, M. F¨ orster, M. Kr¨ uger, C. Lemell, G. Wachter, F. Libisch, T. Madlener, J. Burgd¨ orfer, and P. Hommelhoff, Journal of Modern Optics64, 1054 (2017)

    work page 2017

  57. [57]

    Dienstbier, T

    P. Dienstbier, T. Paschen, and P. Hommelhoff, Nanophotonics10, 3717 (2021)

    work page 2021

  58. [58]

    A. Li, Y. Pan, P. Dienstbier, and P. Hommelhoff, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 137403 (2021)

    work page 2021

  59. [59]

    H. Y. Kim, M. Garg, S. Mandal, L. Seiffert, T. Fennel, and E. Goulielmakis, Nature613, 662 (2023)

    work page 2023

  60. [60]

    H. R. Reiss, Foundations of the strong-field approxima- tion, inProgress in Ultrafast Intense Laser Science III (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008) pp. 1–31

    work page 2008

  61. [61]

    D. B. Miloˇ sevi´ c, G. G. Paulus, D. Bauer, and W. Becker, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics39, R203 (2006)

    work page 2006

  62. [62]

    S. V. Yalunin, M. Gulde, and C. Ropers, Phys. Rev. B 84, 195426 (2011)

    work page 2011

  63. [63]

    Ma and M

    B. Ma and M. Kr¨ uger, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 236901 (2024)

    work page 2024

  64. [64]

    Ma and M

    B. Ma and M. Kr¨ uger, Phys. Rev. A112, 033104 (2025)

    work page 2025

  65. [65]

    S. Kim, T. Schmude, G. Burkard, and A. S. Moskalenko, New Journal of Physics23, 083006 (2021)

    work page 2021

  66. [66]

    Luo and P

    Y. Luo and P. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Appl.17, 044008 (2022)

    work page 2022

  67. [67]

    Turchetti, M

    M. Turchetti, M. R. Bionta, Y. Yang, F. Ritzkowsky, D. R. Candido, M. E. Flatt´ e, K. K. Berggren, and P. D. Keathley, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B38, 1009 (2021)

    work page 2021

  68. [68]

    A. Thon, M. Merschdorf, W. Pfeiffer, T. Klamroth, P. Saalfrank, and D. Diesing, Applied Physics A78, 189 (2004)

    work page 2004

  69. [69]

    Wachter, C

    G. Wachter, C. Lemell, J. Burgd¨ orfer, M. Schenk, M. Kr¨ uger, and P. Hommelhoff, Phys. Rev. B86, 035402 (2012)

    work page 2012

  70. [70]

    L. Shi, I. Babushkin, A. Husakou, O. Melchert, B. Frank, J. Yi, G. Wetzel, A. Demircan, C. Lienau, H. Giessen, M. Ivanov, U. Morgner, and M. Kovacev, Laser & Photonics Reviews15, 2000475 (2021)

    work page 2021

  71. [71]

    Ritzkowsky, M

    F. Ritzkowsky, M. Yeung, E. Bebeti, T. Gebert, T. Mat- suyama, M. Budden, R. E. Mainz, H. Cankaya, K. K. Berggren, G. M. Rossi, P. D. Keathley, and F. X. K¨ artner, Nature Communications15, 10179 (2024)

    work page 2024

  72. [72]

    Ludwig, A

    M. Ludwig, A. K. Kazansky, G. Aguirregabiria, D. C. Marinica, M. Falk, A. Leitenstorfer, D. Brida, J. Aizpu- rua, and A. G. Borisov, Phys. Rev. B101, 241412 (2020)

    work page 2020

  73. [73]

    A. G. Borisov, B. Ma, M. Zapata-Herrera, A. Babaze, 26 M. Kr¨ uger, and J. Aizpurua, ACS Photonics12, 2137 (2025)

    work page 2025

  74. [74]

    Ludwig, G

    M. Ludwig, G. Aguirregabiria, F. Ritzkowsky, T. Ry- bka, D. C. Marinica, J. Aizpurua, A. G. Borisov, A. Leitenstorfer, and D. Brida, Nature Physics16, 341 (2020)

    work page 2020

  75. [75]

    Z. Hu, Y. Kwok, G. Chen, and S. Mukamel, Nano Let- ters21, 6569 (2021)

    work page 2021

  76. [76]

    L. Bhan, C. Covington, and K. Varga, Phys. Rev. B 105, 085416 (2022)

    work page 2022

  77. [77]

    L. Chen, Y. Zhang, G. Chen, and I. Franco, Nature Communications9, 2070 (2018)

    work page 2070

  78. [78]

    Diesing, M

    D. Diesing, M. Merschdorf, A. Thon, and W. Pfeiffer, Applied Physics B: Lasers and Optics78, 443 (2004)

    work page 2004

  79. [79]

    Siday, J

    T. Siday, J. Hayes, F. Schiegl, F. Sandner, P. Menden, V. Bergbauer, M. Zizlsperger, S. Nerreter, S. Lingl, J. Repp, J. Wilhelm, M. A. Huber, Y. A. Gerasimenko, and R. Huber, Nature629, 329 (2024)

    work page 2024

  80. [80]

    Dombi, A

    P. Dombi, A. Apolonski, C. Lemell, G. G. Paulus, M. Kakehata, R. Holzwarth, T. Udem, K. Torizuka, J. Burgd¨ orfer, T. W. H¨ ansch, and F. Krausz, New Jour- nal of Physics6, 39 (2004)

    work page 2004

Showing first 80 references.