Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 33 references

Inhomogeneous mass trap for dark-state polaritons in atomic media

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Dark-state polaritons can be trapped by an inhomogeneous effective mass generated by spatially shaped control fields.

desk verdict A new and plausible mechanism for confining dark-state polaritons with shaped control fields, but the paper never derives the y-boundary condition that its trap depends on. read the letter →

arxiv 2603.18451 v1 pith:377MG3CX submitted 2026-03-19 quant-ph physics.atom-ph

Ding-An Chen , Kai-You Huang , Chun-Yen Hsu , Meng-Cheng Xie , Ite A. Yu , Wen-Te Liao This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phphysics.atom-ph
keywords dark-statepolaritonselectromagneticallyinducedtransparencyinhomogeneousmasstrapstationarylightpulsessyntheticvectorpotentialcomplexharmonicoscillatorall-opticalconfinement
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 sets out to show that dark-state polaritons in a two-dimensional electromagnetically induced transparency system can be confined by a trapping potential that arises from a spatially varying effective mass, with no external optical trap. By using two counter-propagating biased Gaussian beams as control fields, the effective mass of the polariton becomes position-dependent along the transverse direction, producing the 'inhomogeneous mass trap.' For negative fractional Gaussian weight α and positive probe detuning, the trap becomes locally confining and supports bound, oscillating polariton states described by a damped harmonic oscillator. This offers a reconfigurable, all-optical way to control the spatial profile, decay, and motion of stored light, and a step toward Bose-Einstein condensation of dark-state polaritons.

What carries the argument

The key machinery is the inhomogeneous mass trap (IMT): the position-dependence of the effective mass M_y in the kinetic-energy term of the dark-state coherence's Schrödinger-like equation, together with the vector potential A_y, yields the effective potential U_m of Eq. (15). The Gaussian profile of the biased control beams makes M_y vary with z, so the kinetic term turns into a harmonic trap; the counter-propagation creates both scalar and vector potentials. The trap's non-Hermitian imaginary part acts as a spatial filter, and the whole construction reduces near the axis to a quantum harmonic oscillator with complex frequency (Eqs. (17)–(20)), giving analytic formulas for the spatial width

What would settle it

Measure the steady-state spatial width σ of a stored dark-state polariton as the probe detuning Δp is varied at fixed w0, α, and optical depth. Eq. (21) predicts σ ∝ [2Δp + √(Γ²+4Δp²)]^(-1/4); observing no narrowing for Δp>0 (or a width that grows) would directly contradict the inhomogeneous-mass trap prediction.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the effective potential for the dark-state coherence ρ21 takes the form of an inhomogeneous mass trap (IMT), U_m = ((m+1/2)^2 ℏ²k_y²)/(2M_y) − A_y²/(2M_y), where M_y and A_y are position-dependent through the control-field amplitudes. Because M_y varies along the transverse coordinate z, the kinetic term of the polariton's Schrödinger-like equation generates harmonic-like confinement, rather than requiring an external potential. With α<0 and Δp>0 the trap's real part is a well and its imaginary part attenuates the coherence more strongly away from the beam waist, so the system supports damped-oscillator bound states. The paper verifies this against numerical sol

Load-bearing premise

The construction depends on the standing-wave ansatz ρ21 = ψ_nm(z) cos[(m+1/2)k_y y] exp(iA_y y/ℏ − iνt) with k_y = 2π/L, which presumes a particular quantization of the transverse direction; if the physical medium does not enforce these modes, the trap depth, frequency, and bound-state picture all change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Bound dark-state polaritons acquire a tunable spatial profile: the ground-state width σ (Eq. (21)) narrows as probe detuning becomes positive, enabling spatial shaping of stored optical pulses.
  • The complex confinement gives a controllable decay rate χ (Eq. (22)) that can be set by the control-field parameters, allowing the lifetime of stored polaritons to be engineered.
  • Coherent oscillations of displaced polariton wavepackets occur with frequency set by the real part of the harmonic-oscillator frequency (Eq. (19)), providing a way to control quasiparticle motion.
  • A phase shift between the forward and backward control fields creates a vector potential that displaces the polariton along the propagation direction, and beyond a critical phase φ_c the wavepacket splits, acting like an all-optical beam splitter.
  • Because the trap is generated purely by the control beams, it can be switched on and off or reshaped dynamically, offering a reconfigurable platform for quantum memory and, prospectively, for Bose-Einstein condensation of polaritons.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One immediate extension: adding a second pair of cross-oriented structured control beams along another transverse axis should generalize the 2D trap to a full 3D optical trap for polaritons.
  • The imaginary part of the potential behaves like a spatially varying loss; pairing this with a matched gain could realize parity–time-symmetric structures for polaritons in the same medium.
  • A clean experimental probe: measure the oscillation frequency of a displaced polariton wavepacket as a function of probe detuning and compare to the real part of Eq. (19); the predicted dependence on Δp would confirm the harmonic model.
  • If polariton–polariton interactions are present, the harmonic trap should lead to interaction-induced spectral shifts and, in the strong-interaction limit, a possible crossover to a correlated many-body state of light.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes and characterises a mechanism for confining dark-state polaritons (DSPs) in a two-dimensional counter-propagating EIT medium using spatially structured 'biased Gaussian' control fields. Starting from the optical Bloch and probe propagation equations (1)-(5), it invokes an effective Schrödinger equation for the coherence ρ21 (Eq. (6)) with position-dependent effective masses and synthetic gauge potentials. In the L_r≫L limit the authors reduce this to Eq. (14), impose a standing-wave ansatz in y with quantised wavevector k_y=2π/L, and derive an effective one-dimensional trap potential U_m (Eq. (15)) whose real part is a harmonic confining potential for α<0 and Δp>0. They obtain analytic oscillator eigenstates (Eq. (20)), trap frequency (Eq. (19)), width (Eq. (21)), and decay rate (Eq. (22)), and report agreement with numerical solutions of the OBE for ground-/excited-state profiles, decay rates, coherent-state oscillations, and a phase-shift-induced displacement/splitting of the DSP, with threshold ϕ_c (Eq. (24)).

Significance. If correct, the results are significant: they indicate that all-optical, spatially inhomogeneous control fields can generate a trapping potential for DSPs without an external optical trap, with tunable confinement, decay, and coherent motion, and a possible route to Bose-Einstein condensation of DSPs. The paper has notable strengths: the trap parameters in Eqs. (19), (21), and (22) are expressed in design parameters (α, w0, ϕ, k_y, Δp) and are compared with independent OBE extractions rather than fitted to them; Eq. (24) gives a falsifiable threshold; and the figures show quantitative agreement over a wide parameter range. The main reservation is that the central y-mode quantization and the derivation of the effective Schrödinger equation are not established within the manuscript, so the level of confidence is moderate even if the numerical checks are internally consistent.

major comments (3)
  1. [text following Eq. (14), Eqs. (15)-(16)] The trap potential U_m is obtained by substituting the standing-wave ansatz ρ21 = ψ_nm(z) cos[(m+1/2)k_y y] e^{iA_y y/ℏ − iνt} with k_y=2π/L. The quantization of the transverse y motion is assumed, not derived: the physical counter-propagating probe fields obey the first-order propagation equations (4)-(5) with boundary conditions on the incoming amplitudes at the facets, and no argument is given for why ρ21 should vanish at y=±L/2. The sentence that the two control fields 'constitute a cavity along the y direction' is an assertion. Because U_m in Eq. (15) and the trap depth D_m in Eq. (16) scale as (m+1/2)^2 k_y^2, an unquantized q_y would produce a continuum and the bound-state picture changes. This is load-bearing for the central claim and must be fixed by deriving the y-mode structure from the microphysics or by showing explicitly which physical boundary conditions select these modes
  2. [Eq. (6)] The effective Schrödinger equation for ρ21 is the foundation for all analytic results but is introduced through refs. [27,28] without derivation. The assumptions and approximations needed (adiabatic elimination of excited-state coherences, paraxial and slowly varying envelope approximations, weak-probe limit, two-photon resonance, neglect of higher-order spatial derivatives and of ∂_t^2 terms) should be stated explicitly. This is not merely a presentation issue: Eqs. (15)-(24) inherit the validity domain of Eq. (6), and the reader cannot judge whether the numerical OBE agreement confirms the mapping or only the oscillator solutions.
  3. [Figs. 2-4 and numerical methods] The manuscript reports excellent agreement between analytic expressions and OBE solutions, but it does not specify the numerical discretization, boundary conditions, or box size in y. If the OBE code uses the same length L and a discretization that enforces nodes at y=±L/2, the cos[(m+1/2)k_y y] ansatz is effectively input by hand, making the agreement with Eq. (15) circular. Please state the boundary conditions used and demonstrate at least one central comparison in a domain with different length or with absorbing/open boundary conditions to show the result is not an artifact of the y-box.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 2] The axis labels in Fig. 2 appear corrupted (e.g., 'Import' text); please regenerate clean figures.
  2. [Eqs. (18)-(20)] The central effective masses M_c^z and M_c^y and the vector potential A_c^y are introduced after the eigenvalues and eigenfunctions use them; moving the definitions before Eq. (18) would improve readability.
  3. [Eq. (23)] The derivation of the expectation value ⟨y⟩ is not shown; the expression with k_1 and the coth term is opaque and should be justified in the text or a short appendix.
  4. [Fig. 4(b)] The three curves in Fig. 4(b) are distinguished only in the caption; adding direct labels or a legend would help the reader connect the curves to ϕ=0, 0.12π, and 0.15π.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the trap potential is an analytic consequence of the assumed y-mode and is checked against independent OBE numerics, though the y-boundary quantization itself is assumed rather than derived.

full rationale

The derivation chain starts from the OBE/Maxwell equations (1)-(5), then invokes the Schrödinger-type effective equation (6) via refs. [27,28]. This citation includes present co-author W.-T. Liao, but the effective equation is not left as an unverified self-citation: the paper numerically solves the original OBE and compares those solutions with the eigenfunctions of Eq. (6) in Fig. 2, finding good agreement. Thus the central mapping is independently checked against the physical starting model. The central 'inhomogeneous mass trap' is constructed by substituting the y-ansatz ρ21 = ψ_nm(z) cos[(m+1/2)k_y y] exp(i A_y y/ℏ − iνt) with k_y = 2π/L into Eq. (14). The resulting U_m in Eq. (15) is exactly the y-kinetic energy of that assumed standing-wave mode, combined with the vector-potential term. This is an analytic identity, not a fit: U_m, the trap depth D_m, the oscillator frequency ω_m, the width σ, and the decay rate χ are all expressed in terms of design parameters (α, Ω, Δp, Γ, w0, L, η) with no parameter fitted to the data being predicted. The subsequent comparisons with OBE numerics — the ground- and excited-state profiles, the χ values in Fig. 2(f), the coherent-state oscillation frequencies in Fig. 3, and the ϕ-dependent displacement in Fig. 4 — are independent numerical checks. The main caveat is that the y-quantization with k_y=2π/L and nodes at y=±L/2 is imposed by ansatz, not derived from the physical boundary conditions on Eqs. (4)-(5). The statement that the two counter-propagating control fields 'constitute a cavity along the y direction' is an assertion rather than a demonstrated consequence. If the actual medium boundaries fix incoming probe amplitudes instead of imposing ρ21=0 at the facets, a continuum of y-momenta is allowed and the trap depth and frequency would change. This is an omitted proof and a correctness risk, but it is not circular: the prediction does not reduce to an input datum or to a fitted constant, and the derivation of the z-harmonic trap from the assumed y-mode is a legitimate analytic step. Therefore no significant circularity is found.

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

The central derivation uses the standard EIT/dark-state-polariton reduction to a Schrödinger equation, plus the paper-specific assumptions of two-photon resonance, adiabatic elimination, L_r≫L, and a hard-wall standing wave in y. The only numbers chosen by hand are the beam-shaping parameters (α, ϕ, w0, ξ) and the imposed quantization k_y=2π/L; none are fitted to the numerical data. No new physical entities are invented; the synthetic potentials are bookkeeping devices.

free parameters (5)
  • α = -0.25 (or +0.25)
    Fractional contribution of the Gaussian beam to the biased control field. Its sign determines whether the effective potential is a well or barrier; chosen by hand, not fitted.
  • ϕ = 0, 0.12π, 0.15π
    Phase shift between backward Gaussian beam and uniform field; controls vector potential and wavepacket displacement/splitting; chosen by hand.
  • w0 = 1 mm or 1.5 mm
    Beam waist sets trap curvature and spatial scale; experimental knob.
  • ξ = 80 or 200
    Optical depth sets the light-matter coupling η; experimental knob.
  • k_y = 2π/L with L=5 mm
    Standing-wave wavevector imposed by the ansatz along y; not derived from medium boundary conditions. Central to the trap depth and frequency.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Two-photon resonance Δc^F=Δc^B=Δp^F=Δp^B and equal probe/control detunings.
    Invoked before Eq. (1); simplifies the OBE and effective Schrödinger equation; not generally required but central to the derivation.
  • domain assumption The system remains in the dark state and excited-state coherences ρ31^F,B are adiabatically eliminated, yielding the effective single-particle equation Eq. (6).
    Eq. (6) is transferred from Eqs. (1-5) without derivation in this paper; relies on the slow-light/dark-state-polariton reduction in refs [27,28].
  • domain assumption L_r ≫ L, so the control-field amplitudes and phases are effectively uniform along y and Φ≈0.
    Used after Eq. (13) to reduce Eq. (6) to the 1D harmonic-oscillator form Eq. (14); satisfied for chosen parameters but restricts validity.
  • ad hoc to paper The y-dependence is a standing wave cos[(m+1/2)k_y y] with k_y=2π/L.
    The ansatz for ψ_nm is imposed to define the trap potential Eq. (15); boundary conditions at the medium ends are not derived. This is load-bearing for the trap depth and frequency.
  • standard math The harmonic oscillator with complex frequency has known solutions [33].
    Used to write the eigenfunctions and eigenvalues in Eq. (20).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Inhomogeneous mass trap for dark-state polaritons in atomic media." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/377MG3CX

@misc{pith2026260318451,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Inhomogeneous mass trap for dark-state polaritons in atomic media},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/377MG3CX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2603.18451}
}
read the original abstract

The generation of a trapping potential for dark-state polaritons in a two-dimensional electromagnetically induced transparency system is theoretically studied. We show that such a trap can arise from a spatially inhomogeneous effective mass of the dark-state polariton. Because this mass inhomogeneity can be engineered by tuning the parameters of the control fields, the motion, spatial profile, and coherent behavior of bound dark-state polaritons can be tailored accordingly. Our results enable spatial controls of optical information and provide a possible route toward realizing Bose-Einstein condensation of dark-state polaritons in a trapping potential.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.18451 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Two-dimensional counter-propagating EIT system. Green [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references

  1. [1]

    S. E. Harris, Electromagnetically induced transparency, Phys. Today50, 36 (1997)

    1997

  2. [2]

    L. V . Hau, S. E. Harris, Z. Dutton, and C. H. Behroozi, Light speed reduction to 17 metres per second in an ultracold atomic gas, Nature397, 594 (1999)

    1999

  3. [3]

    D. F. Phillips, A. Fleischhauer, A. Mair, R. L. Walsworth, and M. D. Lukin, Storage of light in atomic vapor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 783 (2001)

    2001

  4. [4]

    Kocharovskaya, Y

    O. Kocharovskaya, Y . Rostovtsev, and M. O. Scully, Stopping light via hot atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 628 (2001)

    2001

  5. [5]

    Chen, M.-J

    Y .-H. Chen, M.-J. Lee, I.-C. Wang, S. Du, Y .-F. Chen, Y .-C. Chen, and I. A. Yu, Coherent optical memory with high stor- age efficiency and large fractional delay, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 083601 (2013)

    2013

  6. [6]

    Hsiao, P.-J

    Y .-F. Hsiao, P.-J. Tsai, H.-S. Chen, S.-X. Lin, C.-C. Hung, C.-H. Lee, Y .-H. Chen, Y .-F. Chen, I. A. Yu, and Y .-C. Chen, Highly efficient coherent optical memory based on electromagnetically induced transparency, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 183602 (2018)

    2018

  7. [7]

    Y . Wang, J. Li, S. Zhang, K. Su, Y . Zhou, K. Liao, S. Du, H. Yan, and S.-L. Zhu, Efficient quantum memory for single- photon polarization qubits, Nature Photonics13, 346 (2019)

    2019

  8. [8]

    Chu, X.-C

    K.-I. Chu, X.-C. Lu, K.-H. Chiang, Y .-H. Lin, C.-D. Chen, I. A. Yu, W.-T. Liao, and Y .-F. Chen, Slow and stored light via elec- tromagnetically induced transparency using aΛ-type supercon- ducting artificial atom, Phys. Rev. Res.7, L012015 (2025)

    2025

Show all 33 references
  1. [9]

    Fleischhauer and M

    M. Fleischhauer and M. D. Lukin, Dark-state polaritons in elec- tromagnetically induced transparency, Phys. Rev. Lett.84, 5094 (2000)

    2000

  2. [10]

    Bajcsy, A

    M. Bajcsy, A. S. Zibrov, and M. D. Lukin, Stationary pulses of light in an atomic medium, Nature426, 638 (2003)

    2003

  3. [11]

    Lin, W.-T

    Y .-W. Lin, W.-T. Liao, T. Peters, H.-C. Chou, J.-S. Wang, H.- W. Cho, P.-C. Kuan, and I. A. Yu, Stationary light pulses in cold atomic media and without bragg gratings, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 213601 (2009)

    2009

  4. [12]

    Park, Y .-W

    K.-K. Park, Y .-W. Cho, Y .-T. Chough, and Y .-H. Kim, Experi- mental demonstration of quantum stationary light pulses in an atomic ensemble, Phys. Rev. X8, 021016 (2018)

    2018

  5. [13]

    Kim and Y .-H

    U.-S. Kim and Y .-H. Kim, Simultaneous trapping of two optical pulses in an atomic ensemble as stationary light pulses, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 093601 (2022)

    2022

  6. [14]

    Kim, K.-T

    B. Kim, K.-T. Chen, K.-Y . Chen, Y .-S. Chiu, C.-Y . Hsu, Y .-H. Chen, and I. A. Yu, Experimental demonstration of stationary dark-state polaritons dressed by dipole-dipole interaction, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 133001 (2023)

    2023

  7. [15]

    F. E. Zimmer, J. Otterbach, R. G. Unanyan, B. W. Shore, and M. Fleischhauer, Dark-state polaritons for multicomponent and stationary light fields, Phys. Rev. A77, 063823 (2008)

    2008

  8. [16]

    Fleischhauer, J

    M. Fleischhauer, J. Otterbach, and R. G. Unanyan, Bose- einstein condensation of stationary-light polaritons, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 163601 (2008)

    2008

  9. [17]

    Otterbach, J

    J. Otterbach, J. Ruseckas, R. G. Unanyan, G. Juzeli ¯unas, and M. Fleischhauer, Effective magnetic fields for stationary light, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 033903 (2010)

    2010

  10. [18]

    Kim and Y .-H

    U.-S. Kim and Y .-H. Kim, Quasiparticle properties of stationary light polaritons in atoms, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 023292 (2025)

    2025

  11. [19]

    Chen, M.-J

    Y .-H. Chen, M.-J. Lee, W. Hung, Y .-C. Chen, Y .-F. Chen, and I. A. Yu, Demonstration of the interaction between two stopped light pulses, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 173603 (2012)

    2012

  12. [20]

    Noh and D

    C. Noh and D. G. Angelakis, Quantum simulations and many- body physics with light, Reports on Progress in Physics80, 016401 (2017)

    2017

  13. [21]

    Kim, K.-T

    B. Kim, K.-T. Chen, S.-S. Hsiao, S.-Y . Wang, K.-B. Li, J. Ruseckas, G. Juzeli¯unas, T. Kirova, M. Auzinsh, Y .-C. Chen, et al., A weakly-interacting many-body system of rydberg po- laritons based on electromagnetically induced transparency, Communications Physics4, 101 (2021)

    2021

  14. [22]

    Otterbach, R

    J. Otterbach, R. G. Unanyan, and M. Fleischhauer, Confining stationary light: Dirac dynamics and klein tunneling, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 063602 (2009)

    2009

  15. [23]

    W.-T. Liao, T. Peters, E.-C. Shen, and I. A. Yu, Propagation, broadening, and energy decay of quasi-stationary light pulses in thermal atoms, Chinese Journal of Physics47, 817 (2009)

    2009

  16. [24]

    H. Y . Ling, Y .-Q. Li, and M. Xiao, Electromagnetically induced grating: Homogeneously broadened medium, Phys. Rev. A57, 1338 (1998)

    1998

  17. [25]

    A. W. Brown and M. Xiao, All-optical switching and routing based on an electromagnetically induced absorption grating, Optics letters30, 699 (2005)

    2005

  18. [26]

    Zimmer, A

    F. Zimmer, A. Andr´e, M. Lukin, and M. Fleischhauer, Coherent control of stationary light pulses, Optics communications264, 441 (2006)

    2006

  19. [27]

    Kuan, S.-Y

    Y .-H. Kuan, S.-Y . Lee, S.-W. Shao, W.-C. Chiang, I.-K. Liu, J. Ruseckas, G. Juzeli¯unas, Y .-J. Lin, and W.-T. Liao, Synthetic landau levels and robust chiral edge states for dark-state polari- tons in a static and scalable continuum media, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, L042029 (2023)

    2023

  20. [28]

    Shia, S.-W

    H.-C. Shia, S.-W. Shao, W.-C. Chiang, Y .-H. Kuan, I.-K. Liu, T. Kirova, G. Juzeli¯unas, Y .-J. Lin, and W.-T. Liao, Generation and coherent control of dark-state spatial modes, Opt. Lett.50, 4302 (2025)

    2025

  21. [29]

    E. A. Cornell and C. E. Wieman, Nobel lecture: Bose-einstein condensation in a dilute gas, the first 70 years and some recent experiments, Rev. Mod. Phys.74, 875 (2002)

    2002

  22. [30]

    C. J. Pethick and H. Smith,Bose–Einstein condensation in di- lute gases(Cambridge university press, 2008)

    2008

  23. [31]

    S. E. Harris, J. E. Field, and A. Imamo ˘glu, Nonlinear opti- cal processes using electromagnetically induced transparency, Phys. Rev. Lett.64, 1107 (1990)

    1990

  24. [32]

    C. Liu, Z. Dutton, C. H. Berhoozi, and L. V . Hau, Observation of coherent optical information storage in an atomic mediumus- ing halted light pulses, Nature409, 490 (2001)

    2001

  25. [33]

    Jannussis and E

    A. Jannussis and E. Skuras, Harmonic oscillator with complex frequency, Il Nuovo Cimento B94, 29 (1986)

    1986

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.