pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.00242 · v1 · pith:22CXKGB6new · submitted 2026-05-29 · ⚛️ physics.atom-ph · cond-mat.quant-gas

Experimental observation of strong field stabilization

Anna R. Dardia , Spencer Walker , Yifei Bai , Petros Kousis , Alexandra S. Landsman , David M. Weld This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 19:19 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.atom-ph cond-mat.quant-gas
keywords strong-field stabilizationneutral atomswavepacket bifurcationionization rateoscillating fieldsground statetrapped atoms
0
0 comments X

The pith

Trapped neutral atoms exhibit stabilization of a ground state against intense oscillating fields.

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

The paper establishes that bound quantum states can become more stable rather than tearing apart as the intensity of an oscillating field increases past a threshold. By using trapped neutral atoms to stand in for electrons in a laser field, the experiment directly images the predicted splitting of the wavefunction into separate lobes and measures an ionization rate that rises then falls with increasing field strength. The stabilization regime is mapped out and found to persist even when the drive frequency drops to the scale of the system's lowest natural excitations. This provides an experimental window into a long-predicted regime of extreme quantum dynamics that has been difficult to reach with conventional lasers.

Core claim

Using trapped neutral atoms to emulate the dynamics of bound electrons in an extremely strong laser field, the experiment observes strong-field stabilization of a ground state. This includes imaging the predicted spatial bifurcation of the bound state wavefunction, measuring an ionization rate that is non-monotonic in field amplitude, and mapping the regime where stabilization occurs. The effect persists down to drive frequencies on the order of the lowest-energy excitations.

What carries the argument

Trapped neutral atoms as stand-ins for bound electrons in strong oscillating fields, used to image wavepacket bifurcation and track non-monotonic ionization rates.

If this is right

  • Stabilization persists at drive frequencies comparable to the lowest natural excitations of the system.
  • The approach maps out the full regime of stabilization experimentally.
  • It supplies a complementary laboratory tool for strong-field phenomena near or beyond the reach of current laser technology.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The emulation method could be adapted to test stabilization in other quantum systems where direct laser access is impractical.
  • Non-monotonic ionization behavior may appear in natural high-intensity oscillating environments such as certain astrophysical plasmas.
  • Control of the stabilization threshold via trap parameters might offer new routes to suppress unwanted ionization in atomic physics experiments.

Load-bearing premise

The trapped atoms reproduce the quantum dynamics of a bound electron in a real intense laser field without confounding effects from the trapping potential or atom-atom interactions.

What would settle it

If the measured ionization rate continues to rise monotonically with field amplitude instead of turning over, or if the imaged wavefunction shows no spatial bifurcation into separate components.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.00242 by Alexandra S. Landsman, Anna R. Dardia, David M. Weld, Petros Kousis, Spencer Walker, Yifei Bai.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Unshaken Gaussian trap potential (β = 0) as a function of position scaled by the beam waist w. Blue solid: Gaussian potential Vtrap(x) = −V0 exp(−2x 2/w2 ). Magenta dash–dot: cut– parabola approximation (harmonic oscillator truncated at V = 0). Cyan dashed: trapezoidal approximation. The potential depth is V0. Horizontal lines denote the chemical potentials for condensates with N0 = 40 k, 100 k, and 250 k,… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Cycle-averaged potential Vavg(x)/V0 for six values of β with beam waist w = 100.5 µm. Blue solid curves: numerical potential. Green dashed curves: tangent parabolas at the origin. Red dashed curves: tangent parabolas at the bifurcated minima. The transition from a single-well structure (β < βc) to a double-well structure (β > βc) is evident. 3 Split-Operator Method The Hamiltonian decomposes as Hˆ = Tˆ + V… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Ground-state density profiles obtained from the GPE (solid blue) and from the harmonic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Remaining fraction after 32 cycles (16 cycles of shaking + 16 cycles of rest) for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Condensate density (left) and current density (right) for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Condensate density (left) and current density (right) for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Bohmian trajectories for N0 = 40,000 atoms at 40 Hz. Left: density heatmaps with tra￾jectories overlaid (black curves indicate the shaking envelope at x = ±a0(t)). Right: corresponding Bohmian velocities (black curves indicate the velocity envelope at v ≈ ±a0(t)ωdrive). Colors indi￾cate initial coordinate x0. Rows correspond to the same shaking amplitudes as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Bohmian trajectories for N0 = 250,000 atoms at 40 Hz. Left: density heatmaps with trajectories overlaid (black curves indicate the shaking envelope at x = ±a0(t)). Right: correspond￾ing Bohmian velocities (black curves indicate the velocity envelope at v ≈ ±a0(t)ωdrive). Colors indicate initial coordinate x0. Rows correspond to the same shaking amplitudes as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Density evolution for N0 = 250,000 atoms shaken at 25 Hz for four amplitudes: a0 = 9.47 µm (top), 75.79 µm, 200 µm, and 700 µm (bottom). 24 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Bohmian trajectories (left column) and corresponding velocities (right column) for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Time-resolved evolution of the density for varied atom numbers. In all cases, the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Current densities for a single atom driven at shaking amplitudes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p038_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Bohmian trajectories for a single atom driven at shaking amplitudes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p039_13.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Strong oscillating fields are expected to tear apart bound quantum states. Theoretical studies predict a striking reversal: that as the field intensity is raised above some threshold, bound states like atoms can become increasingly stable, accompanied by a spatial bifurcation of the bound state wavefunction. This strong field stabilization was predicted decades ago in the context of atoms in pulsed laser fields, but has resisted experimental observation due to extreme intensity requirements and theoretical controversy. Here we report the experimental observation of strong-field stabilization of a ground state, using trapped neutral atoms to emulate the dynamics of bound electrons in an extremely strong laser field. We image the predicted wavepacket bifurcation, measure an ionization rate non-monotonic in field amplitude, and map out the regime of stabilization. Stabilization persists down to surprisingly low drive frequencies, on the order of the lowest-energy excitations. These results confirm a long-standing prediction in extreme quantum dynamics, and showcase a complementary tool for probing strong-field phenomena near and beyond the frontier of current laser technology.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the experimental observation of strong-field stabilization using trapped neutral atoms to emulate the quantum dynamics of bound electrons in an intense oscillating laser field. Key results include imaging of the predicted wavepacket bifurcation, measurement of a non-monotonic ionization rate versus field amplitude, and delineation of the stabilization regime, which extends to drive frequencies on the order of the lowest-energy excitations.

Significance. If the analog mapping holds without significant confounding from the trap or interactions, the result would confirm a decades-old theoretical prediction in strong-field physics that has eluded direct laser-based observation due to intensity and pulse constraints. The approach provides a potentially useful complementary platform for studying extreme quantum dynamics near or beyond current laser frontiers.

major comments (1)
  1. [Experimental setup and analog mapping discussion] The central claim depends on the trapped-atom system faithfully reproducing the single-particle dynamics of an electron in a free strong oscillating field, including the bifurcation and non-monotonic ionization. The trapping potential introduces an external harmonic confinement absent from the theoretical case, and finite density may add mean-field or collisional effects; the manuscript must demonstrate quantitatively (via simulation, control measurements, or parameter estimates) that these remain negligible across the reported range, as this directly affects whether the observations can be mapped to the stabilization prediction.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Results] Clarify the precise definition and measurement protocol for the 'ionization rate' used to demonstrate non-monotonicity, including how background losses or trap-induced effects are subtracted.
  2. [Abstract and discussion] The statement that stabilization 'persists down to surprisingly low drive frequencies' would benefit from an explicit comparison (e.g., ratio or plot) to the theoretical threshold or to the atomic excitation energies.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments. We address the single major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim depends on the trapped-atom system faithfully reproducing the single-particle dynamics of an electron in a free strong oscillating field, including the bifurcation and non-monotonic ionization. The trapping potential introduces an external harmonic confinement absent from the theoretical case, and finite density may add mean-field or collisional effects; the manuscript must demonstrate quantitatively (via simulation, control measurements, or parameter estimates) that these remain negligible across the reported range, as this directly affects whether the observations can be mapped to the stabilization prediction.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative validation of the analog mapping is required. The manuscript already includes order-of-magnitude estimates showing the trap frequency is much lower than the drive frequency and that mean-field shifts are small compared to the drive amplitude. To strengthen the claim, we will add explicit numerical simulations comparing the trapped and free-electron cases, plus supporting control data, in the revised manuscript. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: experimental observation with no derivation chain

full rationale

The paper is an experimental report of observations using trapped atoms to emulate strong-field stabilization. No derivation, first-principles calculation, or fitted parameter is presented that reduces to the claimed result by construction. The abstract and description emphasize direct imaging of wavepacket bifurcation and measurement of non-monotonic ionization rates, with no equations or self-citations that would create a self-definitional or fitted-input loop. The analog mapping is an experimental design choice subject to external validation, not a mathematical reduction internal to the paper.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated. The central mapping between trapped-atom dynamics and laser-driven electron dynamics is an unelaborated modeling assumption.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5711 in / 1043 out tokens · 19466 ms · 2026-06-28T19:19:10.247936+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

55 extracted references

  1. [1]

    Structure of a quantized vortex in boson systems.Il Nuovo Cimento (1955- 1965), 20(3):454–477, 1961

    Eugene P Gross. Structure of a quantized vortex in boson systems.Il Nuovo Cimento (1955- 1965), 20(3):454–477, 1961

    1955

  2. [2]

    Vortex lines in an imperfect bose gas.Sov

    Lev P Pitaevskii. Vortex lines in an imperfect bose gas.Sov. Phys. JETP, 13(2):451–454, 1961

    1961

  3. [3]

    Construction of higher order symplectic integrators.Physics letters A, 150(5- 7):262–268, 1990

    Haruo Yoshida. Construction of higher order symplectic integrators.Physics letters A, 150(5- 7):262–268, 1990

    1990

  4. [4]

    R. Dum, A. Sanpera, K.-A. Suominen, M. Brewczyk, M. Ku´ s, K. Rzazewski, and M. Lewen- stein. Wave Packet Dynamics with Bose-Einstein Condensates.Physical Review Letters, 80(18):3899–3902, May 1998

    1998

  5. [5]

    Lev Pitaevskii and Sandro Stringari.Bose-Einstein condensation and superfluidity, volume

  6. [6]

    Oxford University Press, 2016

    2016

  7. [7]

    Calculation of resonance energies and widths using the complex absorbing potential method.Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, 26(23):4503, 1993

    UV Riss and H-D Meyer. Calculation of resonance energies and widths using the complex absorbing potential method.Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, 26(23):4503, 1993

    1993

  8. [8]

    Kramers.Collected scientific papers

    H.A. Kramers.Collected scientific papers. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1956

    1956

  9. [9]

    Perturbation method for atoms in intense light beams.Physical Review Letters, 21(12):838, 1968

    Walter C Henneberger. Perturbation method for atoms in intense light beams.Physical Review Letters, 21(12):838, 1968

    1968

  10. [10]

    https://dlmf.nist.gov/10.35

    NIST Digital Library of Mathematical Functions.§10.35 generating function and associated series. https://dlmf.nist.gov/10.35. Accessed: 2026-01-30

    2026

  11. [11]

    Maxwell, David M

    Javier Arg¨ uello-Luengo, Javier Rivera-Dean, Philipp Stammer, Andrew S. Maxwell, David M. Weld, Marcelo F. Ciappina, and Maciej Lewenstein. Analog simulation of high-harmonic generation in atoms.PRX Quantum, 5(1):010328, February 2024

    2024

  12. [12]

    E. A. Volkova, A. M. Popov, and O. V. Tikhonova. Ionization and stabilization of atoms in a high-intensity, low-frequency laser field.Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics, 113(3):394–406, September 2011

    2011

  13. [13]

    Quantentheorie in hydrodynamischer form.Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik, 40(3– 4):322–326, 1927

    Erwin Madelung. Quantentheorie in hydrodynamischer form.Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik, 40(3– 4):322–326, 1927

    1927

  14. [14]

    A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ”Hidden” Variables

    David Bohm. A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ”Hidden” Variables. I.Phys. Rev., 85:166–179, Jan 1952

    1952

  15. [15]

    A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ”Hidden” Variables

    David Bohm. A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ”Hidden” Variables. II.Phys. Rev., 85:180–193, Jan 1952. 34

    1952

  16. [16]

    ´Angel S Sanz and Salvador Miret-Art´ es.A Trajectory Description of Quantum Processes. II. Applications: A Bohmian Perspective, volume 831. Springer, 2013

    2013

  17. [17]

    Dynamics of tunneling ionization using Bohmian me- chanics.Phys

    Nicolas Douguet and Klaus Bartschat. Dynamics of tunneling ionization using Bohmian me- chanics.Phys. Rev. A, 97:013402, Jan 2018

    2018

  18. [18]

    Strong-field ionization phenomena re- vealed by quantum trajectories.Phys

    Taylor Moon, Klaus Bartschat, and Nicolas Douguet. Strong-field ionization phenomena re- vealed by quantum trajectories.Phys. Rev. Lett., 133:073201, Aug 2024

    2024

  19. [19]

    Cambridge university press, 1995

    Peter R Holland.The quantum theory of motion: an account of the de Broglie-Bohm causal interpretation of quantum mechanics. Cambridge university press, 1995

    1995

  20. [20]

    Theory of bose- einstein condensation in trapped gases.Reviews of modern physics, 71(3):463, 1999

    Franco Dalfovo, Stefano Giorgini, Lev P Pitaevskii, and Sandro Stringari. Theory of bose- einstein condensation in trapped gases.Reviews of modern physics, 71(3):463, 1999

    1999

  21. [21]

    Springer, 2005

    Robert E Wyatt.Quantum dynamics with trajectories: introduction to quantum hydrodynam- ics. Springer, 2005

    2005

  22. [22]

    N. B. Delone and Vladmir P. Krainov. Atomic stabilization in a laser field.Physics-Uspekhi, 38, 1995

    1995

  23. [23]

    M. P. de Boer. Indications of high-intensity adiabatic stabilization in neon.Physical Review Letters, 71(20):3263–3266, 1993

    1993

  24. [24]

    M. P. de Boer, J. H. Hoogenraad, R. B. Vrijen, R. C. Constantinescu, L. D. Noordam, and H. G. Muller. Adiabatic stabilization against photoionization: An experimental study.Physical Review A, 50(5):4085–4098, November 1994

    1994

  25. [25]

    Nondispersive electronic wave packets in mul- tiphoton processes.Physical review letters, 75(8):1487, 1995

    Andreas Buchleitner and Dominique Delande. Nondispersive electronic wave packets in mul- tiphoton processes.Physical review letters, 75(8):1487, 1995

    1995

  26. [26]

    Non-dispersive wave packets in periodically driven quantum systems.Physics reports, 368(5):409–547, 2002

    Andreas Buchleitner, Dominique Delande, and Jakub Zakrzewski. Non-dispersive wave packets in periodically driven quantum systems.Physics reports, 368(5):409–547, 2002

    2002

  27. [27]

    Scars of kramers–henneberger atoms

    Elena Floriani, Jonathan Dubois, and Cristel Chandre. Scars of kramers–henneberger atoms. The European Physical Journal D, 78(12):152, 2024

    2024

  28. [28]

    D. A. Kirzhnits.Field Theoretical Methods in Many-Body Systems, volume 8 ofInternational Series of Monographs in Natural Philosophy. Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1967

    1967

  29. [29]

    Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 1987

    Victor Nikolaevich Popov.Functional integrals and collective excitations. Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 1987

    1987

  30. [30]

    Springer Science & Business Media, 2013

    Stig Lundqvist and Norman H March.Theory of the inhomogeneous electron gas. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013

    2013

  31. [31]

    Orbital-free density functional theory: An attractive electronic structure method for large-scale first-principles simulations.Chemical Reviews, 123(21):12039–12104, 2023

    Wenhui Mi, Kai Luo, SB Trickey, and Michele Pavanello. Orbital-free density functional theory: An attractive electronic structure method for large-scale first-principles simulations.Chemical Reviews, 123(21):12039–12104, 2023

    2023

  32. [32]

    Equations of state of elements based on the generalized fermi-thomas theory.Physical Review, 75(10):1561, 1949

    Richard Phillips Feynman, Nicholas Metropolis, and Edward Teller. Equations of state of elements based on the generalized fermi-thomas theory.Physical Review, 75(10):1561, 1949. 35

    1949

  33. [33]

    Photoabsorption and charge oscillation of the thomas—fermi atom.Reviews of modern physics, 45(3):333, 1973

    JA Ball, JA Wheeler, and EL Firemen. Photoabsorption and charge oscillation of the thomas—fermi atom.Reviews of modern physics, 45(3):333, 1973

    1973

  34. [34]

    Time-dependent thomas-fermi approach for electron dynamics in metal clusters.Physical review letters, 80(25):5520, 1998

    A Domps, P-G Reinhard, and E Suraud. Time-dependent thomas-fermi approach for electron dynamics in metal clusters.Physical review letters, 80(25):5520, 1998

    1998

  35. [35]

    Self-consistent equations including exchange and correlation effects.Physical review, 140(4A):A1133, 1965

    Walter Kohn and Lu Jeu Sham. Self-consistent equations including exchange and correlation effects.Physical review, 140(4A):A1133, 1965

    1965

  36. [36]

    Density-functional approach to local-field effects in finite systems: Photoabsorption in the rare gases.Physical Review A, 21(5):1561, 1980

    A Zangwill and Paul Soven. Density-functional approach to local-field effects in finite systems: Photoabsorption in the rare gases.Physical Review A, 21(5):1561, 1980

    1980

  37. [37]

    Density-functional theory for time-dependent systems

    Erich Runge and Eberhard KU Gross. Density-functional theory for time-dependent systems. Physical review letters, 52(12):997, 1984

    1984

  38. [38]

    Boitsov, Karen Z

    Aleksandr V. Boitsov, Karen Z. Hatsagortsyan, and Christoph H. Keitel. Quasiperiodic dy- namics in the nondipole x-ray strong field ionization in stabilization regime, 2026

    2026

  39. [39]

    Variational derivation of nuclear hydrodynamics.Physics Letters B, 63(1):8–10, 1976

    MJ Giannoni, D Vautherin, M Veneroni, and DM Brink. Variational derivation of nuclear hydrodynamics.Physics Letters B, 63(1):8–10, 1976

    1976

  40. [40]

    F. Bloch. Bremsverm¨ ogen von atomen mit mehreren elektronen.Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik, 81:363– 376, 1933

    1933

  41. [41]

    L. H. Thomas. The calculation of atomic fields.Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 23:542–548, 1927

    1927

  42. [42]

    Un metodo statistico per la determinazione di alcune propriet` a dell’atomo

    Enrico Fermi. Un metodo statistico per la determinazione di alcune propriet` a dell’atomo. Rendiconti Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 6:602–607, 1927

    1927

  43. [43]

    C. F. von Weizs¨ acker. Zur theorie der kernmassen.Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik, 96:431–458, 1935

    1935

  44. [44]

    Quantum corrections to the Thomas-Fermi equation.Soviet Phys

    DA Kirzhnits. Quantum corrections to the Thomas-Fermi equation.Soviet Phys. JETP, 5, 1957

    1957

  45. [45]

    P. A. M. Dirac. Note on exchange phenomena in the Thomas atom.Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 26:376–385, 1930

    1930

  46. [46]

    Attosecond physics.Reviews of modern physics, 81(1):163– 234, 2009

    Ferenc Krausz and Misha Ivanov. Attosecond physics.Reviews of modern physics, 81(1):163– 234, 2009

    2009

  47. [47]

    Mottelson.Nuclear Structure, Volume I: Single-Particle Motion

    Aage Bohr and Ben R. Mottelson.Nuclear Structure, Volume I: Single-Particle Motion. W. A. Benjamin, New York and Amsterdam, 1969

    1969

  48. [48]

    Mottelson.Nuclear Structure, Volume II: Nuclear Deformations

    Aage Bohr and Ben R. Mottelson.Nuclear Structure, Volume II: Nuclear Deformations. World Scientific, Singapore, 1998

    1998

  49. [49]

    H. A. Bethe. Thomas-Fermi theory of nuclei.Physical Review, 167(4):879, 1968

    1968

  50. [50]

    A. M. Zheltikov. Keldysh parameter for laser-nucleus interactions.Physical Review A, 112(6):063501, 2025

    2025

  51. [51]

    Molecule without Electrons: Binding Bare Nuclei with Strong Laser Fields.Physical Review Letters, 90(24), 2003

    Olga Smirnova, Michael Spanner, and Misha Ivanov. Molecule without Electrons: Binding Bare Nuclei with Strong Laser Fields.Physical Review Letters, 90(24), 2003. 36

    2003

  52. [52]

    Quantum fluids of light.Reviews of Modern Physics, 85(1):299–366, 2013

    Iacopo Carusotto and Cristiano Ciuti. Quantum fluids of light.Reviews of Modern Physics, 85(1):299–366, 2013

    2013

  53. [53]

    Propagation of a quantum fluid of light in a cavityless nonlinear optical medium: General theory and response to quantum quenches.Physical Review A, 92(4):043802, 2015

    Pierre- ´Elie Larr´ e and Iacopo Carusotto. Propagation of a quantum fluid of light in a cavityless nonlinear optical medium: General theory and response to quantum quenches.Physical Review A, 92(4):043802, 2015

    2015

  54. [54]

    Femtosecond filamentation in transparent media

    Arnaud Couairon and Andr´ e Mysyrowicz. Femtosecond filamentation in transparent media. Physics reports, 441(2-4):47–189, 2007

    2007

  55. [55]

    Observation of two-dimensional dynamic localization of light.Physical review letters, 104(22):223903, 2010

    Alexander Szameit, Ivan L Garanovich, Matthias Heinrich, Andrey A Sukhorukov, Felix Dreisow, Thomas Pertsch, Stefan Nolte, Andreas T¨ unnermann, Stefano Longhi, and Yuri S Kivshar. Observation of two-dimensional dynamic localization of light.Physical review letters, 104(22):223903, 2010. 37

    2010