Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 44 references

Single-shot pulse retrieval of femtosecond bright squeezed vacuum

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Single-shot spectral interferometry retrieves the femtosecond pulse shape of individual bright-squeezed-vacuum shots, revealing 27.2 fs pulses with a random π phase flip.

desk verdict First single-shot spectral phase retrieval of BSV at 1040 nm, with a plausible but reference-phase-sensitive claim about the 27.2 fs average duration. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.17746 v1 pith:UEJTPGJJ submitted 2025-09-22 physics.optics quant-ph

Yuval Kern , Ido Nisim , Michael Birk , Andrei Rasputnyi , Doron Behar , Zhaopin Chen , Ido Kaminer , Pavel Sidorenko
show 2 more authors
Oren Cohen Michael Krüger
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.opticsquant-ph
keywords brightsqueezedvacuumsingle-shotspectralinterferometryfemtosecondpulseretrievalphasegroupdelayπambiguitynonclassicallightultrafastoptics
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

The paper claims that single-shot spectral interferometry can fully retrieve the spectral phase and amplitude of individual femtosecond pulses of bright squeezed vacuum (BSV), a quantum state of light with zero average field but huge shot-to-shot intensity fluctuations. Using a synchronized, fully characterized coherent reference pulse, the authors measure interference fringes for each BSV shot and extract its phase. They report an average pulse duration of 27.2 fs (FWHM), a shot-to-shot standard deviation of 5.5 fs, and a random binary π phase offset relative to the pump, visible as a nodal pattern in the fringes. If correct, this establishes BSV as a practical single-shot femtosecond source whose waveform is knowable for each pulse, a prerequisite for sub-cycle strong-field and attosecond experiments.

What carries the argument

Single-shot spectral interferometry with a coherent reference: the unknown BSV pulse is overlapped with a 960–1100 nm reference pulse (characterized by a commercial FROG device) at a fixed delay of about 3.05 ps; the resulting spectral fringe pattern is Fourier-transformed to isolate the AC term, whose phase equals the difference between the BSV and reference spectral phases. Subtracting the reference phase yields the BSV spectral phase per shot, from which the group delay and time-domain intensity envelope are computed. A two-stage BBO amplifier with a 22.8 cm spacing filters the BSV to a single spatial mode, and the π phase ambiguity appears as a zero-crossing nodal structure in the modula

What would settle it

Repeat the single-shot interferometric measurement on the same BSV source but replace the FROG-characterized reference with one characterized by an independent technique (e.g., SPIDER or a different FROG algorithm), and check that the retrieved group delay and average pulse duration reproduce the reported values within the stated uncertainty; alternatively, measure a known coherent pulse of similar bandwidth with the identical setup and confirm the retrieved duration matches its independently measured value.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper demonstrates that the spectral phase of an individual bright-squeezed-vacuum pulse can be measured in a single shot by interfering it with a fully characterized coherent reference and analyzing the spectral fringes. Applied to 1009 single-peak BSV shots at 1040 nm, the method yields an average pulse duration of 27.2 fs (FWHM) — much shorter than the 178 fs pump — with a standard deviation of 5.5 fs across shots. The interferograms exhibit a nodal structure that reveals the BSV's random phase ambiguity of π rad, with a measured binary phase distribution of 0.525 ± 0.035 for one phase versus the other. The authors conclude that BSV is a viable source of femtosecond light pulses with

Load-bearing premise

The retrieved BSV spectral phase is obtained by subtracting the phase of a reference pulse characterized by a commercial FROG; if that FROG reconstruction is inaccurate across the 960–1100 nm bandwidth, the reported group delay and 27.2 fs pulse duration would be correspondingly wrong.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Single-peak BSV shots have a consistent group delay, with a pulse duration of 27.2 fs on average and 5.5 fs shot-to-shot variation, far shorter than the pump pulse.
  • The random π phase ambiguity of BSV is directly observable in single-shot interferograms as a nodal structure, with a binary phase distribution consistent with quantum-vacuum randomness.
  • The method requires no iterative retrieval algorithm and works at low intensities, unlike FROG, making it suitable for characterizing weak or single-shot nonclassical pulses.
  • Demonstrating BSV at 1040 nm aligns the technique with Yb-based laser systems, broadening access to ultrafast quantum-light sources.
  • Retrieving the time-dependent electric field of each BSV shot is a prerequisite for sub-cycle metrology of electron dynamics driven by nonclassical light.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The per-shot π phase retrieval could be exploited as a fast binary random number generator or as a quantum-controlled phase switch in light–matter interaction experiments.
  • Extending the reference spectrum to fully cover the BSV bandwidth (e.g., via gas-filled fiber broadening) would likely sharpen the time-domain reconstruction and bring the retrieved duration closer to the 19.3 fs transform limit.
  • If the group-delay oscillations are truly FROG artifacts, an independent reference characterization (SPIDER, dispersion scan) would flatten them; if they persist, they would indicate real residual spectral phase structure in BSV not predicted by current simple theory.
  • The same single-shot interferometric approach could be applied to the double-peak spectral modes, potentially separating and retrieving the phase of each spatial-spectral mode and revealing correlated signal–idler phase behavior.
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 single-shot spectral interferometry on bright squeezed vacuum (BSV) at 1040 nm. A coherent reference pulse, broadened in fiber and characterized with a commercial FROG, is interfered with individual BSV shots. Fourier-transform fringe analysis retrieves the spectral phase of each shot relative to the reference. The authors select 1009 single-peak spectra out of 16,000 recorded shots and reconstruct an average pulse duration of 27.2 fs (FWHM) with a 5.5 fs shot-to-shot standard deviation, much shorter than the 178 fs pump. They also report a binary π phase ambiguity, evidenced by nodal fringes and a 105:95 phase distribution. The central claim is that individual single-peak BSV shots are femtosecond pulses with a stable group delay, a well-defined spectral phase, and a random 0/π phase offset relative to the pump.

Significance. If the result holds, this is a significant advance: it demonstrates single-shot spectral-phase retrieval for bright squeezed vacuum, a state whose temporal structure had previously only been characterized in ensemble averages. The Fourier-transform spectral interferometry approach is conceptually simple and parameter-free, and the π-ambiguity evidence is direct and compelling: the nodal structure in the interferograms and the near-equal phase distribution are exactly what one expects for phase-ambiguous squeezed vacuum. This opens a practical route to shot-resolved waveform characterization of BSV for strong-field and attosecond experiments. The main risk is calibration: the retrieved spectral phase is referenced to a FROG-characterized coherent pulse, and the authors themselves attribute artifacts in the group delay and temporal profile to FROG imperfections. The manuscript currently provides no uncertainty bound or independent cross-check for that reference phase, so the quantitative duration claim is not yet fully supported.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 2.B and Sec. 2.C] The central quantitative result—average pulse duration 27.2 fs versus the 19.3 fs transform-limited value—is obtained by subtracting the spectral phase of a reference pulse characterized with a commercial FROG. The authors explicitly state that 'fine oscillations and peaks' in the average group delay and 'side peaks' in the temporal profile are due to 'imperfections in the FROG reconstruction of the reference pulse.' No error bars, uncertainty budget, or independent cross-check (e.g., a second characterization method, or a known chirped-pulse test) is provided. A smooth spectral-phase error in the FROG result, such as residual quadratic phase, would appear as a common-mode chirp on every BSV shot and would directly change the retrieved FWHM. The 5.5 fs shot-to-shot standard deviation does not constrain this common-mode error because it cancels in shot-to-shot differences. The manuscript
  2. [Sec. 2.C] Only 1009 of 16,000 recorded shots are analyzed, and the criteria for selecting 'single-peak spectra' (number of peaks, peak wavelength, spectral width) are deferred to a Supplementary Material that is not posted with the arXiv version. The selection could bias the reported average duration, the group-delay statistics, and the 105:95 phase distribution. The paper should state the selection criteria explicitly, report how many shots were rejected by each criterion, and show a sensitivity analysis (e.g., how the average duration and standard deviation change with selection thresholds). Without this, the representativeness of the 27.2 fs result for BSV 'single-peak' shots is not verifiable.
  3. [Sec. 2.B and Sec. 2.C] The interferometric delay is described as 'not stabilized.' In Fourier-transform spectral interferometry, the phase of the AC term contains the term ωτ, where τ is the delay. If τ varies from shot to shot, the retrieved spectral phase and group delay will contain that jitter. The reconstruction section does not explain how τ is determined or removed for each shot, nor how delay jitter is distinguished from real BSV group-delay variation. This is load-bearing for the claim that 'the group delay is consistent between the various shots' and for the reported 5.5 fs standard deviation. The missing Supplement might address this, but the posted text does not.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 2.A] The text says 'see Figure 1(b) for a sketch of the setup,' but Figure 1 shows BSV illustrations, not the experimental layout. The setup sketch appears to be Figure 2(a). Please correct the cross-reference.
  2. [Sec. 2.C] Typo: 'due to to imperfections' should be 'due to imperfections.'
  3. [Sec. 2.A] Typo: 'mixtures of the two (not shown)' is acceptable, but earlier 'Mixed of the two' should be 'mixtures.'
  4. [Supplemental] The Supplement is essential for evaluating both the FROG characterization and the shot-selection criteria. It should be included with the posted manuscript, not only referenced.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: BSV phase extraction is a direct interferometric measurement against an independently FROG-characterized reference.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained: the single-shot BSV spectral phase is extracted from the AC term of each interferogram by subtracting the independently measured spectral phase of a coherent reference (Sec. 2.B). The reference phase was characterized with a commercial FROG device, i.e., a separate instrument, not fitted to the BSV data. The reported average duration 27.2 fs and shot-to-shot spread 5.5 fs are direct statistics of the retrieved group delay and spectrum; no parameter is fitted to the BSV interferograms and then renamed as a prediction. The pi-phase ambiguity is observed as a nodal structure in the fringe modulation and counted (105:95), not imposed by the retrieval algorithm. Self-citations (e.g., [17] for prior BSV FROG results) are used only for context and do not carry the load of the new measurement. The acknowledged limitation that FROG reference-phase imperfections contribute to oscillations in the average group delay is an accuracy concern, not a circularity: the reference phase is an input from an external device, and any error enters as a common-mode systematic, which the paper discloses.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central measurement relies on standard Fourier-transform spectral interferometry and on the experimental assumptions that the FROG-characterized reference phase is accurate and that the spatial and spectral mode filtering selects the fundamental BSV mode. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • single-peak shot selection criteria = not disclosed; thresholds in Supplement
    1009 of 16,000 shots were selected based on number of peaks, peak wavelength, and spectral width. These hand-chosen thresholds define the subset from which the 27.2 fs average and 5.5 fs variation are computed.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Unseeded OPA amplifies quantum vacuum fluctuations, and degenerate phase-sensitive amplification produces two possible phases, 0 and pi, between pump and down-converted light.
    Invoked in Section 2.B to interpret the nodal fringe structure as the BSV pi phase ambiguity.
  • domain assumption The FROG-characterized reference pulse spectral phase is accurate across the 960-1100 nm bandwidth.
    Section 2.B-C: retrieved BSV phase is obtained by subtracting the reference phase, so any FROG error transfers to the reported pulse duration and group delay.
  • standard math Fourier-transform spectral interferometry gives the relative spectral phase of the unknown pulse from the AC term of the interferogram.
    Section 2.C references Takeda et al. [41]; this is the standard retrieval used throughout.
  • domain assumption g(2)(0) approaches 3 at the center of the spectrum for degenerate squeezed vacuum.
    Used in Section 2.A and Figure 2(e) to identify the fundamental BSV mode, with reference [37].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Single-shot pulse retrieval of femtosecond bright squeezed vacuum." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UEJTPGJJ

@misc{pith2026250917746,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Single-shot pulse retrieval of femtosecond bright squeezed vacuum},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UEJTPGJJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.17746}
}
abstract

Bright squeezed vacuum (BSV) is an intense quantum state of light with zero mean electric field and huge photon number fluctuations, sufficiently intense to drive extreme nonlinear processes and imprint nonclassical statistics. However, the temporal structure of single BSV shots has not been fully characterized. Here, we retrieve the spectral and temporal pulse characteristics of a set of single-peak BSV shots. It is obtained by realizing a femtosecond BSV source at 1040 nm with a single spatial mode and perform single-shot spectral interferometry with a fully characterized coherent-state reference pulse. Our approach reveals that the group delay is consistent between the various shots, resulting in an average pulse duration of 27.2 fs, much shorter than the pump pulse, and a variation of 5.5 fs (standard deviation). We also observe a characteristic nodal structure in the spectral interferograms, demonstrating the BSV's random phase ambiguity of $\pi$ rad. Our approach demonstrates that BSV is a viable source of femtosecond light pulses for attosecond sub-cycle metrology of ultrafast electron dynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.17746 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration of bright squeezed vacuum (BSV). (a) Illus￾tration of the electric field and its fluctuations for a “classical” (coherent-state) state laser pulse. Red curve: Average electric field. (b) The same for BSV. While any single realization of BSV field (dotted black curve) has a defined waveform, the field fluctuations across many possible pulses can be positive or negative with equal probability, resulting i… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Generation and characteristics of 1040-nm BSV. (a) Ex￾perimental setup. SH and SHG: second harmonic and second harmonic generation, respectively; BBO: β-barium borate crys￾tal. (b) Normalized spectra of BSV shots with the fundamental spectral mode (blue) and their average (red). (c) The same, but for the double-peak spectral mode. (d) Intensity statistics at 1040 nm (red curve: Fit with BSV photon statistics). (e) S… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Single-shot spectral interferometry with BSV. (a) Typi￾cal single-shot spectral interferogram at a delay of 3.05 ps. (b) Modulation spectrum displaying the interference fringes and the BSV’s nodal structure plotted for a sequence of 200 shots. We normalized the fringes and subtracted the DC offset at a frequency of 286 THz. (c) Color plot of the modulation spec￾trum as a function of shot number for a sequence of 35 … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) shows the results of our reconstruction in the spec￾tral domain. We find that the normalized single-peak spectra differ in both peak position and spectral width. More important is the reconstructed group delay of the BSV shots, also plotted in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:fig…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Multiple-harmonic conversion of 1064 nm radiation in rare gases,

    M. Ferray, A. L ’Huillier, X. F . Li,et al., “Multiple-harmonic conversion of 1064 nm radiation in rare gases,” J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.21, L31 (1988). Research Article 5

    1988

  2. [2]

    Plasma perspective on strong field multiphoton ioniza- tion,

    P . B. Corkum, “Plasma perspective on strong field multiphoton ioniza- tion,” Phys. Rev. Lett.71, 1994–1997 (1993)

    1994

  3. [3]

    Theory of high-harmonic generation by low-frequency laser fields,

    M. Lewenstein, P . Balcou, M. Y . Ivanov,et al., “Theory of high-harmonic generation by low-frequency laser fields,” Phys. Rev. A49, 2117–2132 (1994)

    1994

  4. [4]

    Attosecond metrol- ogy,

    M. Hentschel, R. Kienberger, C. Spielmann,et al., “Attosecond metrol- ogy,” Nature414, 509 (2001)

    2001

  5. [5]

    Observation of a train of attosecond pulses from high harmonic generation,

    P . M. Paul, E. S. Toma, P . Breger,et al., “Observation of a train of attosecond pulses from high harmonic generation,” Science292, 1689– 1692 (2001)

    2001

  6. [6]

    Attosecond science,

    P . B. Corkum and F . Krausz, “Attosecond science,” Nat. Phys.3, 381– 387 (2007)

    2007

  7. [7]

    Attosecond control of electrons emitted from a nanoscale metal tip,

    M. Krüger, M. Schenk, and P . Hommelhoff, “Attosecond control of electrons emitted from a nanoscale metal tip,” Nature475, 78–81 (2011)

    2011

  8. [8]

    Observation of high- order harmonic generation in a bulk crystal,

    S. Ghimire, A. D. DiChiara, E. Sistrunk,et al., “Observation of high- order harmonic generation in a bulk crystal,” Nat. Phys.7, 138–141 (2011)

    2011

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    Linking high harmonics from gases and solids,

    G. Vampa, T. J. Hammond, N. Thiré,et al., “Linking high harmonics from gases and solids,” Nature522, 462–464 (2015)

    2015

  2. [10]

    Ultrafast high- harmonic spectroscopy of solids,

    C. Heide, Y . Kobayashi, S. R. U. Haque, and S. Ghimire, “Ultrafast high- harmonic spectroscopy of solids,” Nat. Phys.20, 1546–1557 (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    R. Boyd, S. Lukishova, and V. Zadkov,Quantum Photonics: Pioneer- ing Advances and Emerging Applications, Springer Series in Optical Sciences (Springer International Publishing, 2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    Advances in high-dimensional quantum entanglement,

    M. Erhard, M. Krenn, and A. Zeilinger, “Advances in high-dimensional quantum entanglement,” Nat. Rev. Mat.2, 365–381 (2020)

    2020

  5. [13]

    Squeezed state of light,

    M. C. Teich and B. E. A. Saleh, “Squeezed state of light,” Quantum Opt. 1, 153 (1989)

    1989

  6. [14]

    Superbunched bright squeezed vacuum state,

    T. S. Iskhakov, A. M. Pérez, K. Y . Spasibko,et al., “Superbunched bright squeezed vacuum state,” Opt. Lett.37, 1919–1921 (2012)

    1919

  7. [15]

    Multiphoton effects enhanced due to ultrafast photon-number fluctuations,

    K. Y . Spasibko, D. A. Kopylov, V. L. Krutyanskiy,et al., “Multiphoton effects enhanced due to ultrafast photon-number fluctuations,” Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 223603 (2017)

    2017

  8. [16]

    Indefinite-mean Pareto photon distribution from amplified quantum noise,

    M. Manceau, K. Y . Spasibko, G. Leuchs,et al., “Indefinite-mean Pareto photon distribution from amplified quantum noise,” Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 123606 (2019)

    2019

  9. [17]

    High-harmonic generation by a bright squeezed vacuum,

    A. Rasputnyi, Z. Chen, M. Birk,et al., “High-harmonic generation by a bright squeezed vacuum,” Nat. Phys.20, 1960–1965 (2024)

    1960

  10. [18]

    Multiphoton electron emission with non-classical light,

    J. Heimerl, A. Mikhaylov, S. Meier,et al., “Multiphoton electron emission with non-classical light,” Nat. Phys.20, 945–950 (2024)

    2024

  11. [19]

    Photon bunching in high- harmonic emission controlled by quantum light,

    S. Lemieux, S. A. Jalil, D. Purschke,et al., “Photon bunching in high- harmonic emission controlled by quantum light,” Nat. Photon.19, 767– 771 (2025)

    2025

  12. [20]

    Measuring and controlling the birth of quantum attosecond pulses,

    M. E. Tzur, C. Mor, N. Y affe,et al., “Measuring and controlling the birth of quantum attosecond pulses,” arXiv p. 2502.09427 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Driving electrons at needle tips strongly with quantum light,

    J. Heimerl, A. Rasputnyi, J. Pölloth,et al., “Driving electrons at needle tips strongly with quantum light,” arXiv p. 2503.22464 (2025)

    2025

  14. [22]

    High-harmonic generation driven by quantum light,

    A. Gorlach, M. E. Tzur, M. Birk,et al., “High-harmonic generation driven by quantum light,” Nat. Phys.19, 1689–1696 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    Direct sampling of electric-field vacuum fluctuations,

    C. Riek, D. V. Seletskiy, A. S. Moskalenko,et al., “Direct sampling of electric-field vacuum fluctuations,” Science350, 420–423 (2015)

    2015

  16. [24]

    Subcycle quantum electrodynam- ics,

    C. Riek, P . Sulzer, M. Seeger,et al., “Subcycle quantum electrodynam- ics,” Nature541, 376–379 (2017)

    2017

  17. [25]

    Enhanced electro-optic sampling with quantum probes,

    S. Virally, P . Cusson, and D. V. Seletskiy, “Enhanced electro-optic sampling with quantum probes,” Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 270504 (2021)

    2021

  18. [26]

    Electro-optic sampling of classical and quantum light,

    I.-C. Benea-Chelmus, J. Faist, A. Leitenstorfer,et al., “Electro-optic sampling of classical and quantum light,” Optica12, 546–563 (2025)

    2025

  19. [27]

    The quantum-optical nature of high harmonic generation,

    A. Gorlach, O. Neufeld, N. Rivera,et al., “The quantum-optical nature of high harmonic generation,” Nat. Commun.11, 4598 (2020)

    2020

  20. [28]

    Generation of optical Schrödinger cat states in intense laser–matter interactions,

    M. Lewenstein, M. F . Ciappina, E. Pisanty,et al., “Generation of optical Schrödinger cat states in intense laser–matter interactions,” Nat. Phys. 17, 1104–1108 (2021)

    2021

  21. [29]

    Photon-statistics force in ultrafast electron dynamics,

    M. Even Tzur, M. Birk, A. Gorlach,et al., “Photon-statistics force in ultrafast electron dynamics,” Nat. Photon.17, 501–509 (2023)

    2023

  22. [30]

    Motion of charged particles in bright squeezed vacuum,

    M. Even Tzur and O. Cohen, “Motion of charged particles in bright squeezed vacuum,” Light. Sci. & Appl.13, 41 (2024)

    2024

  23. [31]

    Quantum phenomena in attosecond science,

    L. Cruz-Rodriguez, D. Dey, A. Freibert, and P . Stammer, “Quantum phenomena in attosecond science,” Nat. Rev. Phys.6, 691–704 (2024)

    2024

  24. [32]

    Experimental control of quantum-mechanical entanglement in an attosecond pump-probe experiment,

    L.-M. Koll, L. Maikowski, L. Drescher,et al., “Experimental control of quantum-mechanical entanglement in an attosecond pump-probe experiment,” Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 043201 (2022)

    2022

  25. [33]

    Measuring the quantum state of photoelectrons,

    H. Laurell, S. Luo, R. Weissenbilder,et al., “Measuring the quantum state of photoelectrons,” Nat. Photon.19, 352–357 (2025)

    2025

  26. [34]

    Polarization-entangled light pulses of 105 photons,

    T. S. Iskhakov, I. N. Agafonov, M. V. Chekhova, and G. Leuchs, “Polarization-entangled light pulses of 105 photons,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 150502 (2012)

    2012

  27. [35]

    Few-cycle Yb-doped laser sources for attosecond science and strong-field physics,

    T.-C. Truong, D. Khatri, C. Lantigua,et al., “Few-cycle Yb-doped laser sources for attosecond science and strong-field physics,” APL Photon. 10, 040902 (2025)

    2025

  28. [36]

    Bright squeezed- vacuum source with 1.1 spatial mode,

    A. M. Pérez, T. S. Iskhakov, P . Sharapova,et al., “Bright squeezed- vacuum source with 1.1 spatial mode,” Opt. Lett.39, 2403–2406 (2014)

    2014

  29. [37]

    Measurement of the quan- tum states of squeezed light,

    G. Breitenbach, S. Schiller, and J. Mlynek, “Measurement of the quan- tum states of squeezed light,” Nature387, 471–475 (1997)

    1997

  30. [38]

    Self-phase-modulation in silica optical fibers,

    R. H. Stolen and C. Lin, “Self-phase-modulation in silica optical fibers,” Phys. Rev. A17, 1448–1453 (1978)

    1978

  31. [39]

    Self-phase modulation enabled, wavelength-tunable ultrafast fiber laser sources: an energy scalable approach,

    W. Liu, C. Li, Z. Zhang,et al., “Self-phase modulation enabled, wavelength-tunable ultrafast fiber laser sources: an energy scalable approach,” Opt. Express24, 15328–15340 (2016)

    2016

  32. [40]

    Y ariv,Quantum Electronics(John Wiley & Sons, 1991)

    A. Y ariv,Quantum Electronics(John Wiley & Sons, 1991)

    1991

  33. [41]

    Fourier-transform method of fringe-pattern analysis for computer-based topography and interferom- etry,

    M. Takeda, H. Ina, and S. Kobayashi, “Fourier-transform method of fringe-pattern analysis for computer-based topography and interferom- etry,” J. Opt. Soc. Am.72, 156–160 (1982)

    1982

  34. [42]

    Attosecond nonlinear polarization and light-matter energy transfer in solids,

    A. Sommer, E. M. Bothschafter, S. A. Sato,et al., “Attosecond nonlinear polarization and light-matter energy transfer in solids,” Nature534, 86– 90 (2016)

    2016

  35. [43]

    Benchmarking of analyt- ical photoionization models for solids using photoionization-induced reflection,

    A. Husakou, F . Morales, M. Richter,et al., “Benchmarking of analyt- ical photoionization models for solids using photoionization-induced reflection,” Phys. Rev. A110, 063511 (2024)

    2024

  36. [44]

    Sub-cycle multidimen- sional spectroscopy of strongly correlated materials,

    V. N. Valmispild, E. Gorelov, M. Eckstein,et al., “Sub-cycle multidimen- sional spectroscopy of strongly correlated materials,” Nat. Photon.18, 432–439 (2024)

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.