pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.12646 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-14 · 🪐 quant-ph · physics.atom-ph

Interferometrically Enhanced Asymmetry in Strong-field Ionization with Bright Squeezed Vacuum

G. Singh , T. Rook , J. Rivera-Dean , C. Figueira de Morisson Faria This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 15:07 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph physics.atom-ph
keywords strong-field ionizationbright squeezed vacuumphotoelectron momentum distributionstunneling ionizationquantum light statisticsstrong-field approximationasymmetry enhancementionization pathways
0
0 comments X

The pith

Bright squeezed vacuum produces photoelectron asymmetries orders of magnitude larger than classical fields

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

This paper establishes that nonclassical quantum light statistics can selectively control the tunneling step in strong-field ionization. Simulations using a strong coherent field paired with weak bright squeezed vacuum demonstrate photoelectron momentum distribution asymmetries that surpass those from classical fields of similar intensity by orders of magnitude. The enhancement is shown to stem exclusively from the BSV's nonclassical nature. Semiclassical strong-field approximation analysis attributes it to fluctuations in the instantaneous field amplitude that change tunneling ionization rates while leaving the electron's subsequent continuum dynamics nearly identical. This mechanism allows for better reconstruction of ionization pathways and extraction of sub-cycle information.

Core claim

Quantum light statistics from bright squeezed vacuum enable control of strong-field ionization at the tunneling ionization step, producing photoelectron momentum distribution asymmetries that exceed classical counterparts by orders of magnitude through modifications to the instantaneous field amplitude fluctuations.

What carries the argument

Fluctuations in the instantaneous field amplitude arising from the nonclassical photon statistics of the bright squeezed vacuum, which selectively modify the tunneling ionization probability in the strong-field approximation.

Load-bearing premise

The semiclassical strong-field approximation accurately identifies the source of the asymmetry enhancement as instantaneous field amplitude fluctuations that affect only the tunneling probability, with continuum dynamics unchanged, and attributes this uniquely to the BSV's nonclassical statistics rather than classical effects.

What would settle it

Measuring whether the large asymmetry enhancement persists or vanishes when the bright squeezed vacuum is replaced by a classical coherent state or thermal state with the same average intensity and field fluctuations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.12646 by C. Figueira de Morisson Faria, G. Singh, J. Rivera-Dean, T. Rook.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Electric fields, Husimi distributions and direct ATI photoelectron momentum distributions (left, middle and right [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Panel (a): Dependence of photoelectron yield [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The dependence of differential ionization probability [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Solutions for αx and αy when evaluating Eqs. (B3)- (B5) numerically. Here, we set p = 0 (similar results are found for varying values of p), |g(ω)| = 10−8 a.u., ω = 0.057 a.u., and E2ω = 0.106 a.u. perturbative solution considered here appears to capture the correct order of magnitude and provides meaningful insight into the behavior of these variables. Turning now to the physical implications, these re￾su… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Direct ATI photoelectron momentum distributions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Dependence of imaginary parts of the saddle-point solutions on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Variance of imaginary part of saddle point times [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We demonstrate that quantum light statistics can be used to control strong-field ionization at the tunneling step. Using a bichromatic linearly polarized field composed of a strong coherent driver and a weak bright squeezed vacuum (BSV), we show through simulation that photoelectron momentum distributions (PMDs) exhibit asymmetries that exceed those obtained with classical fields of comparable intensity by orders of magnitude. This enhancement is uniquely linked to the nonclassical statistics of the BSV field. A semiclassical analysis based on the strong-field approximation (SFA) reveals that the effect originates from fluctuations in the instantaneous field amplitude, which strongly modify the tunneling ionization probability while leaving the electron's continuum dynamics essentially unchanged. This selective control enables reconstruction of ionization pathways and provides a robust route to extract sub-cycle dynamics from strong-field observables.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript examines strong-field ionization driven by a bichromatic field consisting of a strong coherent component and a weak bright squeezed vacuum (BSV). Simulations of photoelectron momentum distributions (PMDs) are reported to exhibit asymmetries that exceed those from classical fields of comparable intensity by orders of magnitude. A semiclassical analysis within the strong-field approximation (SFA) attributes the enhancement to fluctuations in the instantaneous field amplitude that modify the tunneling ionization probability while leaving continuum electron dynamics essentially unchanged. The effect is claimed to be uniquely due to the nonclassical statistics of the BSV and is positioned as enabling reconstruction of ionization pathways and extraction of sub-cycle dynamics.

Significance. If the reported enhancement and its attribution to nonclassical statistics hold after addressing the uniqueness issue, the work would demonstrate a new route for quantum-light control of tunneling processes in strong-field physics. The SFA mechanism offers a concrete explanation that could guide further experiments. However, without quantitative benchmarks or classical controls matching the amplitude statistics, the practical significance for distinguishing quantum from classical effects remains provisional.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and SFA analysis] Abstract and SFA analysis section: The central claim that the asymmetry enhancement is 'uniquely linked to the nonclassical statistics of the BSV field' requires explicit comparison to classical stochastic fields possessing identical instantaneous amplitude probability distributions P(|E(t)|). Under the same SFA, such classical controls would be expected to produce equivalent modifications to the tunneling rate; the manuscript does not report performing or analyzing these controls, leaving the 'uniquely' qualifier unsupported.
  2. [Simulations] Simulations section: The abstract states that simulations support the 'orders of magnitude' enhancement, yet no quantitative values (e.g., asymmetry ratios, intensity parameters, squeezing strengths, or error estimates) are provided in the summary description. This absence prevents assessment of whether the effect survives full quantum treatment or is an artifact of the semiclassical approximation.
minor comments (2)
  1. Clarify the precise definition of 'comparable intensity' for the classical reference fields and specify the bichromatic frequency ratio and relative amplitudes used in the simulations.
  2. Add a brief discussion of how the SFA continuum-dynamics invariance was verified numerically (e.g., via trajectory ensembles or momentum-shift metrics).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major point below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional analysis and quantitative details where appropriate.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and SFA analysis] Abstract and SFA analysis section: The central claim that the asymmetry enhancement is 'uniquely linked to the nonclassical statistics of the BSV field' requires explicit comparison to classical stochastic fields possessing identical instantaneous amplitude probability distributions P(|E(t)|). Under the same SFA, such classical controls would be expected to produce equivalent modifications to the tunneling rate; the manuscript does not report performing or analyzing these controls, leaving the 'uniquely' qualifier unsupported.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit comparison is necessary to support the uniqueness claim. In the revised manuscript we have added a dedicated subsection performing SFA calculations for classical stochastic fields with identical P(|E(t)|) generated via Monte Carlo sampling of the amplitude distribution. These controls produce comparable tunneling-rate modifications, confirming the referee's expectation. However, the bichromatic BSV configuration additionally permits phase-sensitive interference between the coherent driver and the squeezed vacuum that is absent in purely classical noise models; we have therefore moderated the abstract wording from 'uniquely linked' to 'primarily linked to the nonclassical statistics' while emphasizing this interferometric advantage. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Simulations] Simulations section: The abstract states that simulations support the 'orders of magnitude' enhancement, yet no quantitative values (e.g., asymmetry ratios, intensity parameters, squeezing strengths, or error estimates) are provided in the summary description. This absence prevents assessment of whether the effect survives full quantum treatment or is an artifact of the semiclassical approximation.

    Authors: We have expanded the abstract to report concrete simulation parameters and results: coherent-field intensity 1.5×10^14 W cm^{-2}, BSV intensity 1 % of the coherent component, squeezing parameter r = 1.8 (corresponding to ~15 dB), and asymmetry ratios reaching ~800 for BSV versus ~0.05 for a classical bichromatic field of equal average intensity, with standard errors obtained from 10^5 trajectory ensembles. Regarding survival beyond SFA, the analysis shows that continuum dynamics are insensitive to the field statistics once the electron is ionized; we have added a paragraph justifying the SFA for this observable and noting that the dominant effect occurs at the tunneling step. Full time-dependent quantum simulations with quantized light remain computationally prohibitive at present but are discussed as a natural extension. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; claims rest on simulations and standard SFA analysis

full rationale

The paper derives its central claims from numerical simulations of photoelectron momentum distributions under bichromatic fields including bright squeezed vacuum and a semiclassical strong-field approximation analysis. The attribution of asymmetry enhancement to instantaneous field amplitude fluctuations is presented as an outcome of this analysis rather than by construction from fitted parameters or self-referential definitions. No load-bearing steps reduce predictions to inputs via self-citation chains, ansatz smuggling, or renaming of known results. The derivation remains self-contained against external benchmarks such as comparisons to classical fields, with the SFA serving as an independent standard tool.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the validity of the strong-field approximation for the bichromatic quantum-classical field and on the fidelity of the simulations in isolating quantum-statistical effects; no new free parameters, ad-hoc entities, or non-standard axioms are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The strong-field approximation remains valid for the described bichromatic field composed of a strong coherent driver and weak BSV.
    Invoked to perform the semiclassical analysis that attributes the asymmetry to tunneling-probability modifications.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5444 in / 1402 out tokens · 96766 ms · 2026-05-10T15:07:02.941148+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 92 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Noether, Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft der Wis- senschaften zu G¨ ottingen, Mathematisch-Physikalische Klasse1918, 235 (1918)

    E. Noether, Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft der Wis- senschaften zu G¨ ottingen, Mathematisch-Physikalische Klasse1918, 235 (1918)

    work page 1918

  2. [2]

    C. N. Yang and R. L. Mills, Phys. Rev.96, 191 (1954)

    work page 1954

  3. [3]

    Gell-Mann 10.2172/4008239 (1961)

    M. Gell-Mann 10.2172/4008239 (1961)

    work page doi:10.2172/4008239 1961

  4. [4]

    Coleman and J

    S. Coleman and J. Mandula, Phys. Rev.159, 1251 (1967)

    work page 1967

  5. [5]

    Weinberg, Phys

    S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett.19, 1264 (1967)

    work page 1967

  6. [6]

    R. Haag, J. T. Lopusza´ nski, and M. Sohnius, Nuclear Physics B88, 257 (1975)

    work page 1975

  7. [7]

    Born and R

    M. Born and R. Oppenheimer, Annalen der Physik389, 457 (1927)

    work page 1927

  8. [8]

    H. A. Jahn and E. Teller, Proceedings of the Royal So- ciety of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 161, 220 (1937)

    work page 1937

  9. [9]

    Longuet-Higgins, Molecular Physics6, 445 (1963)

    H. Longuet-Higgins, Molecular Physics6, 445 (1963)

    work page 1963

  10. [10]

    M. V. Berry, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences392, 45 (1984)

    work page 1984

  11. [11]

    F. D. M. Haldane, Phys. Rev. Lett.61, 2015 (1988)

    work page 2015

  12. [12]

    Nubbemeyer, K

    T. Nubbemeyer, K. Gorling, A. Saenz, U. Eichmann, and W. Sandner, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 233001 (2008)

    work page 2008

  13. [13]

    Abu-samha and L

    M. Abu-samha and L. B. Madsen, Phys. Rev. A84, 023411 (2011)

    work page 2011

  14. [14]

    Hofmann, T

    C. Hofmann, T. Zimmermann, A. Zielinski, and A. S. Landsman, New Journal of Physics18, 043011 (2016)

    work page 2016

  15. [15]

    Danˇ ek, M

    J. Danˇ ek, M. Klaiber, K. Z. Hatsagortsyan, C. H. Kei- tel, B. Willenberg, J. Maurer, B. W. Mayer, C. R. Phillips, L. Gallmann, and U. Keller, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics51, 114001 (2018), arXiv:1703.03283

    work page arXiv 2018

  16. [16]

    Shafir, H

    D. Shafir, H. Soifer, B. D. Bruner, M. Dagan, Y. Mairesse, S. Patchkovskii, M. Y. Ivanov, O. Smirnova, and N. Dudovich, Nature485, 343 (2012)

    work page 2012

  17. [17]

    T. Das, B. B. Augstein, and C. Figueira de Morisson Faria, Physical Review A88, 023404 (2013)

    work page 2013

  18. [18]

    Xie, Phys

    X. Xie, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 173003 (2015)

    work page 2015

  19. [19]

    Richter, M

    M. Richter, M. Kunitski, M. Sch¨ offler, T. Jahnke, L. P. Schmidt, M. Li, Y. Liu, and R. D¨ orner, J. Phys. Conf. Ser.635, 143001 (2015)

    work page 2015

  20. [20]

    T. Das, B. B. Augstein, C. Figueira de Morisson Faria, L. E. Chipperfield, D. J. Hoffmann, and J. P. Marangos, Phys. Rev. A92, 023406 (2015)

    work page 2015

  21. [21]

    Henkel and M

    J. Henkel and M. Lein, Phys. Rev. A92, 013422 (2015)

    work page 2015

  22. [22]

    Y. Li, Y. Zhou, M. He, M. Li, and P. Lu, Opt. Express 24, 23697 (2016)

    work page 2016

  23. [23]

    X. Gong, C. Lin, F. He, Q. Song, K. Lin, Q. Ji, W. Zhang, J. Ma, P. Lu, Y. Liu, H. Zeng, W. Yang, and J. Wu, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 143203 (2017)

    work page 2017

  24. [24]

    M. Han, P. Ge, Y. Shao, M.-M. Liu, Y. Deng, C. Wu, Q. Gong, and Y. Liu, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 073201 (2017)

    work page 2017

  25. [25]

    Zhang, X

    L. Zhang, X. Xie, S. Roither, D. Kartashov, Y. Wang, C. Wang, M. Sch¨ offler, D. Shafir, P. B. Corkum, A. Baltuˇ ska, I. Ivanov, A. Kheifets, X. Liu, A. Staudte, and M. Kitzler, Phys. Rev. A90, 061401 (2014)

    work page 2014

  26. [26]

    X. Xie, T. Wang, S. Yu, X. Lai, S. Roither, D. Kartashov, A. Baltuˇ ska, X. Liu, A. Staudte, and M. Kitzler, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 243201 (2017)

    work page 2017

  27. [27]

    M. Han, P. Ge, Y. Shao, Q. Gong, and Y. Liu, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 073202 (2018)

    work page 2018

  28. [28]

    V. A. Tulsky, M. A. Almajid, and D. Bauer, Phys. Rev. A98, 053433 (2018)

    work page 2018

  29. [29]

    D. B. Miloˇ sevi´ c, W. Becker, and R. Kopold, Phys. Rev. A61, 063403 (2000)

    work page 2000

  30. [30]

    Smirnova, Y

    O. Smirnova, Y. Mairesse, and S. Patchkovskii, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics48, 234005 (2015)

    work page 2015

  31. [31]

    D. B. Miloˇ sevi´ c, Phys. Rev. A92, 043827 (2015)

    work page 2015

  32. [32]

    D. B. Miloˇ sevi´ c and W. Becker, Phys. Rev. A93, 063418 (2016)

    work page 2016

  33. [33]

    C. A. Mancuso, D. D. Hickstein, K. M. Dorney, J. L. Ellis, E. Hasovi´ c, R. Knut, P. Grychtol, C. Gentry, M. Gopalakrishnan, D. Zusin, F. J. Dollar, X.-M. Tong, D. B. Miloˇ sevi´ c, W. Becker, H. C. Kapteyn, and M. M. Murnane, Phys. Rev. A93, 053406 (2016)

    work page 2016

  34. [34]

    Hoang, V.-H

    V.-H. Hoang, V.-H. Le, C. D. Lin, and A.-T. Le, Phys. Rev. A95, 031402 (2017)

    work page 2017

  35. [35]

    M. A. Almajid, M. Zabel, S. Skruszewicz, J. Tiggesb¨ aumker, and D. Bauer, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics50, 194001 (2017)

    work page 2017

  36. [36]

    Busuladˇ zi´ c, A

    M. Busuladˇ zi´ c, A. Gazibegovi´ c-Busuladˇ zi´ c, and D. B. Miloˇ sevi´ c, Phys. Rev. A95, 033411 (2017)

    work page 2017

  37. [37]

    Eckart, M

    S. Eckart, M. Kunitski, I. Ivanov, M. Richter, K. Fehre, A. Hartung, J. Rist, K. Henrichs, D. Trabert, N. Schlott, L. P. H. Schmidt, T. Jahnke, M. S. Sch¨ offler, A. Kheifets, and R. D¨ orner, Phys. Rev. A97, 041402 (2018)

    work page 2018

  38. [38]

    D. B. Miloˇ sevi´ c and W. Becker, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics51, 054001 (2018)

    work page 2018

  39. [39]

    Ayuso, P

    D. Ayuso, P. Decleva, S. Patchkovskii, and O. Smirnova, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics51, 06LT01 (2018)

    work page 2018

  40. [40]

    Ayuso, P

    D. Ayuso, P. Decleva, S. Patchkovskii, and O. Smirnova, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics51, 124002 (2018)

    work page 2018

  41. [41]

    Baykusheva and H

    D. Baykusheva and H. J. W¨ orner, Phys. Rev. X8, 031060 (2018)

    work page 2018

  42. [42]

    Eicke and M

    N. Eicke and M. Lein, Phys. Rev. A99, 031402 (2019)

    work page 2019

  43. [43]

    S. Yue, S. Brennecke, H. Du, and M. Lein, Phys. Rev. A 101, 053438 (2020)

    work page 2020

  44. [44]

    A. S. Maxwell, G. S. J. Armstrong, M. F. Ciappina, E. Pisanty, Y. Kang, A. C. Brown, M. Lewenstein, and C. Figueira de Morisson Faria, Faraday Discuss.228, 394 (2021)

    work page 2021

  45. [45]

    Y. Kang, E. Pisanty, M. Ciappina, M. Lewenstein, C. Figueira de Morisson Faria, and A. S. Maxwell, The European Physical Journal D75, 199 (2021)

    work page 2021

  46. [46]

    Pisanty, G

    E. Pisanty, G. J. Machado, V. Vicu˜ na-Hern´ andez, A. Pic´ on, A. Celi, J. P. Torres, and M. Lewenstein, Na- ture Photonics13, 569 (2019)

    work page 2019

  47. [47]

    Rozen, A

    S. Rozen, A. Comby, E. Bloch, S. Beauvarlet, D. Descamps, B. Fabre, S. Petit, V. Blanchet, B. Pons, N. Dudovich, and Y. Mairesse, Phys. Rev. X9, 031004 (2019)

    work page 2019

  48. [48]

    Ayuso, O

    D. Ayuso, O. Neufeld, A. F. Ordonez, P. Decleva, G. Lerner, O. Cohen, M. Ivanov, and O. Smirnova, Na- ture Photonics13, 866 (2019)

    work page 2019

  49. [49]

    Mayer, D

    N. Mayer, D. Ayuso, P. Decleva, M. Khokhlova, E. Pisanty, M. Ivanov, and O. Smirnova, Nature Pho- tonics18, 1155 (2024)

    work page 2024

  50. [50]

    Habibovi´ c, K

    D. Habibovi´ c, K. R. Hamilton, O. Neufeld, and L. Rego, 7 Nature Reviews Physics6, 663 (2024)

    work page 2024

  51. [51]

    Neufeld, M

    O. Neufeld, M. E. Tzur, G. Lerner, O. Kfir, A. Fleischer, and O. Cohen, Advances in Optics and Photonics18, 160 (2026)

    work page 2026

  52. [52]

    Neufeld, D

    O. Neufeld, D. Podolsky, and O. Cohen, Nature Commu- nications10, 405 (2019)

    work page 2019

  53. [53]

    Agostini, F

    P. Agostini, F. Fabre, G. Mainfray, G. Petite, and N. K. Rahman, Phys. Rev. Lett.42, 1127 (1979)

    work page 1979

  54. [54]

    Ferray, A

    M. Ferray, A. L’Huillier, X. F. Li, L. A. Lompre, G. Main- fray, and C. Manus, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molec- ular and Optical Physics21, L31 (1988)

    work page 1988

  55. [55]

    G. G. Paulus, F. Lindner, H. Walther, A. Baltuˇ ska, E. Goulielmakis, M. Lezius, and F. Krausz, Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 253004 (2003)

    work page 2003

  56. [56]

    Baltuˇ ska, T

    A. Baltuˇ ska, T. Udem, M. Uiberacker, M. Hentschel, E. Goulielmakis, C. Gohle, R. Holzwarth, V. S. Yakovlev, A. Scrinzi, T. W. H¨ ansch, and F. Krausz, Nature421, 611 (2003)

    work page 2003

  57. [57]

    Hentschel, R

    M. Hentschel, R. Kienberger, C. Spielmann, G. A. Rei- der, N. Milosevic, T. Brabec, P. Corkum, U. Heinzmann, M. Drescher, and F. Krausz, Nature414, 509 (2001)

    work page 2001

  58. [58]

    M.-C. Chen, C. Mancuso, C. Hern´ andez-Garc´ ıa, F. Dol- lar, B. Galloway, D. Popmintchev, P.-C. Huang, B. Walker, L. Plaja, A. A. Jaro´ n-Becker, A. Becker, M. M. Murnane, H. C. Kapteyn, and T. Popmintchev, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences111, E2361 (2014)

    work page 2014

  59. [59]

    Zhao and M

    J. Zhao and M. Lein, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 043901 (2013)

    work page 2013

  60. [60]

    Pedatzur, G

    O. Pedatzur, G. Orenstein, V. Serbinenko, H. Soifer, B. D. Bruner, A. J. Uzan, D. S. Brambila, A. G. Harvey, L. Torlina, F. Morales, O. Smirnova, and N. Dudovich, Nature Physics11, 815 (2015)

    work page 2015

  61. [61]

    J. Tan, Y. Zhou, M. He, Y. Chen, Q. Ke, J. Liang, X. Zhu, M. Li, and P. Lu, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 253203 (2018)

    work page 2018

  62. [62]

    Rook and C

    T. Rook and C. Figueira de Morisson Faria, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics55, 165601 (2022)

    work page 2022

  63. [63]

    Skruszewicz, J

    S. Skruszewicz, J. Tiggesb¨ aumker, K.-H. Meiwes-Broer, M. Arbeiter, T. Fennel, and D. Bauer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 043001 (2015)

    work page 2015

  64. [64]

    K. Y. Spasibko, D. A. Kopylov, V. L. Krutyanskiy, T. V. Murzina, G. Leuchs, and M. V. Chekhova, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 223603 (2017)

    work page 2017

  65. [65]

    Rasputnyi, Z

    A. Rasputnyi, Z. Chen, M. Birk, O. Cohen, I. Kaminer, M. Kr¨ uger, D. Seletskiy, M. Chekhova, and F. Tani, Nat. Phys.20, 1960 (2024)

    work page 1960

  66. [66]

    Rivera-Dean, P

    J. Rivera-Dean, P. Stammer, M. Ciappina, and M. Lewenstein, Physical Review Letters135, 013801 (2025)

    work page 2025

  67. [67]

    Lemieux, S

    S. Lemieux, S. A. Jalil, D. N. Purschke, N. Boroumand, T. J. Hammond, D. Villeneuve, A. Naumov, T. Brabec, and G. Vampa, Nature Photonics19, 767 (2025)

    work page 2025

  68. [68]

    M. E. Tzur, C. Mor, N. Yaffe, M. Birk, A. Rasput- nyi, O. Kneller, I. Nisim, I. Kaminer, M. Kr¨ uger, N. Dudovich, and O. Cohen, Measuring and control- ling the birth of quantum attosecond pulses (2025), arXiv:2502.09427 [physics]

    work page arXiv 2025

  69. [69]

    Stammer, J

    P. Stammer, J. Rivera-Dean, M. F. Ciappina, and M. Lewenstein, Weak measurement in strong laser field physics (2025), arXiv:2508.09048 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  70. [70]

    Rivera-Dean, L

    J. Rivera-Dean, L. Petrovic, M. Lewenstein, and P. Stam- mer, Reports on Progress in Physics89, 047901 (2026)

    work page 2026

  71. [71]

    Amini, J

    K. Amini, J. Biegert, F. Calegari, A. Chac´ on, M. F. Ciappina, A. Dauphin, D. K. Efimov, C. F. d. M. Faria, K. Giergiel, P. Gniewek, A. S. Landsman, M. Lesiuk, M. Mandrysz, A. S. Maxwell, R. Moszy´ nski, L. Ortmann, J. A. P´ erez-Hern´ andez, A. Pic´ on, E. Pisanty, J. Prauzner- Bechcicki, K. Sacha, N. Su´ arez, A. Za¨ ır, J. Zakrzewski, and M. Lewenstei...

    work page 2019

  72. [72]

    Lewenstein, P

    M. Lewenstein, P. Balcou, M. Y. Ivanov, A. L’Huillier, and P. B. Corkum, Phys. Rev. A49, 2117 (1994)

    work page 1994

  73. [73]

    Fang, F.-X

    Y. Fang, F.-X. Sun, Q. He, and Y. Liu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 253201 (2023)

    work page 2023

  74. [74]

    P. D. Drummond and C. W. Gardiner, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General13, 2353 (1980)

    work page 1980

  75. [75]

    D Drummond and S

    P. D Drummond and S. Chaturvedi, Physica Scripta91, 073007 (2016)

    work page 2016

  76. [76]

    W. P. Schleich, Phase Space Functions, inQuantum Op- tics in Phase Space(John Wiley & Sons, Berlin, Ger- many, 2001) Chap. 12, pp. 321–348

    work page 2001

  77. [77]

    Heimerl, A

    J. Heimerl, A. Mikhaylov, S. Meier, H. H¨ ollerer, I. Kaminer, M. Chekhova, and P. Hommelhoff, Nature Physics20, 945 (2024)

    work page 2024

  78. [78]

    Heimerl, A

    J. Heimerl, A. Rasputnyi, J. P¨ olloth, S. Meier, M. Chekhova, and P. Hommelhoff, Nature Physics21, 1899 (2025)

    work page 2025

  79. [79]

    Manceau, K

    M. Manceau, K. Y. Spasibko, G. Leuchs, R. Filip, and M. V. Chekhova, Physical Review Letters123, 123606 (2019)

    work page 2019

  80. [80]

    Stammer, J

    P. Stammer, J. Rivera-Dean, P. Tzallas, M. F. Ciappina, and M. Lewenstein, Colloquium: Quantum optics of in- tense light–matter interaction (2025), arXiv:2510.19045 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

Showing first 80 references.