Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 63 references

Pulse-Duration Control of Subcycle Multiband Electron Dynamics Extends the High-Harmonic Cutoff in a Light-Driven Insulator

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper demonstrates that varying laser pulse duration and intensity can select distinct multiband electron pathways in MgO, extending high-harmonic emission to photon energies of 25–50 eV before decoherence suppresses it.

desk verdict Solid experiment-theory package on pulse-duration control of the HHG cutoff in MgO; the two-threshold mechanism is plausible but the quantitative subcycle threshold is loose, so the pathway assignment is suggestive rather than proven. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.06129 v1 pith:PQGBCARM submitted 2026-08-06 physics.optics cond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.app-ph

Hortense Allegre , Simon V. B. Jensen , Joseph J. Broughton , Tim Klee , Yan Li , Jon P. Marangos , Nicolas Tancogne-Dejean , Angel Rubio
show 2 more authors
John W. G. Tisch Mary R. Matthews
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.opticscond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.app-ph PACS 42.65.Ky78.47.J
keywords high-harmonicgenerationsolid-stateHHGMgOpulsedurationcontrolsubcycleelectrondynamicsmultibandextreme-ultravioletemissionthresholdvectorpotential
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

High-order harmonic generation in solids usually treats intensity, wavelength, and crystal orientation as the adjustable parameters. This paper adds pulse duration as an equally decisive knob: by compressing the driving pulse from 29 fs to 5 fs while raising peak intensity, it separates two distinct excitation pathways in the insulator MgO. Long pulses above about $6\ \mathrm{TW/cm^2}$ accumulate carrier transfers over many optical cycles into higher conduction bands, pushing emission to 25–50 eV. Short pulses above about $22\ \mathrm{TW/cm^2}$ instead complete the same high-energy transfer within a single half-cycle, before decoherence can erase the coherent emission. The result matters because it identifies pulse duration as a practical control for reaching extreme-ultraviolet photon energies in compact solid-state sources.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is a momentum-space threshold model: efficient carrier transfer into higher conduction bands is assumed to occur only within narrow windows of radius $\delta_\Gamma \approx 0.05\pi\ \mathrm{a.u.}^{-1}$ around the $\Gamma$ point (valence-to-first-band excitation) and $\delta_X \approx 0.07\pi\ \mathrm{a.u.}^{-1}$ around the $X$ point (transfer into the second and third conduction bands), with widths set by $\delta \approx \sqrt{m^{*}\omega_L}$. The acceleration theorem $k(t)=k_0+A(t)$ turns the laser vector potential into a momentum displacement, so the existence of a half-cycle $\Gamma$-to-$X$ trajectory is fixed by the threshold $A_{t1} = (2\pi/a - \delta_\Gamma - \delta_X)/2$, and the full-cycle trajectory by $A_{t2} = 2A_{t1}$. These thresholds map to intensities $I_{t1} \approx 5.5\ \mathrm{TW/cm^2}$ and $I_{t2} \approx 22\ \mathrm{TW/cm^2}$, which the paper identifies with the observed onset of the high-energy plateau for 29 fs and 5 fs pulses. A complementary intra- and intercycle factorization of the harmonic yield explains why shorter pulses broaden and weaken harmonic peaks via an intercycle interference factor that scales with $N_c^2$ and widens as $(N_c^2-1)^{-1/2}$.

What would settle it

Measure the time-frequency map of MgO harmonic emission for a 5 fs pulse at intensities just above and below $I_{t2} \approx 22\ \mathrm{TW/cm^2}$: the subcycle model predicts the 20–30 eV burst appears and disappears within a half-cycle immediately at the intensity threshold, whereas the multicycle model predicts a delayed build-up over several cycles; a build-up delay comparable to the pulse duration would refute the subcycle channel.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper demonstrates that the harmonic cutoff in MgO is not simply set by peak intensity: pulse duration selects which multiband pathway carries electrons to high recombination energies. Below the first threshold, electrons climb the lowest conduction band and recombine with the usual low-order spectrum. Once the vector potential reaches $A_{t1} = (2\pi/a - \delta_\Gamma - \delta_X)/2$, electrons can traverse from the $\Gamma$ point to the $X$ point within a half-cycle and, over successive cycles, transfer into higher conduction bands, creating a broadened high-energy plateau from 25 eV toward 50 eV. With few-cycle pulses that reach intensities above $I_{t2} \approx 22\ \mathrm{TW/cm^2}$ (the intensity corresponding to $A_{t2}=2A_{t1}$), the same high-band transfer occurs within a single subcycle excursion, so the high-energy plateau reappears with narrow harmonic peaks. The intermediate 17 fs pulse exceeds the first threshold but its shorter interaction time broadens the harmonic peaks so much that the plateau is not observable, explaining the non-monotonic reappearance.

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes that efficient transfer of electrons into higher conduction bands happens only within narrow momentum windows of width $\delta \approx \sqrt{m^{*}\omega_L}$ around the $\Gamma$ and $X$ points, with the high-energy plateau threshold set by those windows; if the real transfer regions are wider or the transition dipoles differ, the match between $I_{t1} \approx 5.5\ \mathrm{TW/cm^2}$ and the observed onset is largely coincidental.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At a fixed intensity, compressing the pulse from 29 fs to 17 fs broadens harmonic peaks by decreasing the number of coherent cycles $N_c$, which is why the 25–50 eV plateau disappears in the 17 fs data even though the field exceeds the first threshold.
  • For 29 fs pulses, exceeding $I_{t1} \approx 5.5\ \mathrm{TW/cm^2}$ opens a multicycle pathway that progressively transfers carriers into higher conduction bands, producing the 25–50 eV plateau at the cost of suppressing low-order harmonic yield.
  • For 5 fs pulses, exceeding $I_{t2} \approx 22\ \mathrm{TW/cm^2}$ opens a subcycle pathway: a single accelerated wavepacket visits both $\Gamma$ and $X$ within one half-cycle, re-creating the high-energy plateau with harmonic peaks as narrow as the low-order ones.
  • Pulse duration thus becomes a design parameter for solid-state XUV sources, alongside intensity, wavelength, and crystal orientation.
  • The same threshold logic predicts that along the $\Gamma$–$K$ direction the onset intensities rise to about $7.3$ and $29\ \mathrm{TW/cm^2}$, consistent with the much weaker high-energy emission measured there.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension the paper leaves open is carrier-envelope phase control: for a 5 fs pulse, the CEP should shift the subcycle $\Gamma$-to-$X$ trajectory and modulate the high-energy plateau on a half-cycle timescale, an effect the CEP-averaged simulations do not address.
  • If the threshold picture holds for other crystals, it gives a material-search rule: reducing the reciprocal-space distance between a strong excitation point and the first high-band transfer point (e.g., via strain or different lattices) should proportionally lower $I_{t1}$ and $I_{t2}$, making 50 eV-class emission easier to reach.
  • The subcycle pathway's speed implies it should be far less sensitive to temperature and phonon scattering than the multicycle pathway, so a temperature-dependent HHG measurement could separate the two channels without changing the pulse shape.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports an experimental and theoretical study of high-harmonic generation (HHG) in MgO driven by 29 fs, 17 fs, and 5 fs pulses at intensities of 0.8–74 TW/cm^2. The authors observe that the 25–50 eV plateau appearing for 29 fs pulses above ~6 TW/cm^2 disappears at 17 fs and reappears for 5 fs pulses only above ~30 TW/cm^2. TDDFT simulations using the experimentally retrieved pulse shapes reproduce the main spectral trends. The paper attributes the long-pulse plateau to cumulative multicycle carrier transfer between Γ and X with threshold I_t1 ≈ 5.5 TW/cm^2, and the short-pulse reappearance to a subcycle Γ–X transfer channel with threshold I_t2 = 4 I_t1 ≈ 22 TW/cm^2. Pulse duration is proposed as a control knob that selects between these pathways.

Significance. Confidence in the experimental trends is increased by the TDDFT simulations that use measured pulse shapes rather than idealized pulses, and by the time-frequency analysis supporting different emission times for the two plateaus. The comparison with a Fourier-limited pulse is a useful falsifiable prediction. If the threshold model is correct, the work would establish pulse duration as a decisive parameter in solid-state HHG and would connect the 50 eV cutoff to band-structure geometry. The paper is less strong on quantitative experimental characterization: no error bars are given for the spectra or intensity calibration, and the predicted subcycle threshold (22 TW/cm^2) is not matched by the observed onset (~30 TW/cm^2). The conceptual framework is appealing, but the quantitative pathway-selective claim currently rests on an ad hoc momentum-window estimate.

major comments (3)
  1. [Figs. 2(c) and 5; paragraph defining A_t2] The predicted subcycle threshold I_t2 = 4 I_t1 ≈ 22 TW/cm^2 is not equal to the experimentally reported reappearance threshold of ~30 TW/cm^2. The text states that "once this intensity threshold is exceeded, the high-energy plateau reappears", implying that the observed onset is I_t2, but 30 TW/cm^2 is ~36% larger than 22 TW/cm^2. Since the central novelty is the assignment of the reappearing plateau to the subcycle A_t2 channel, this discrepancy must be resolved: either the experiment should measure the 5 fs intensity dependence with smaller steps to locate the onset, or the model should be revised to explain why the onset occurs at ~30 TW/cm^2. The 5 fs TDDFT simulation at 41.4 TW/cm^2 does not discriminate, as it is well above both values.
  2. [Fig. 4 and SI Sec. III, Fig. 3] The thresholds A_t1 = (2π/a − δ_Γ − δ_X)/2 and A_t2 = 2A_t1 depend on the ad hoc momentum-space windows δ_j ≈ sqrt(m*_j ω_L). These windows are estimated, not derived or fitted, and the SI (Sec. III, Fig. 3) offers only a visual "corroboration" from transition dipoles without a quantitative comparison. Given that δ_Γ + δ_X ≈ 0.38 a.u.^{-1} is comparable to 2π/a ≈ 0.79 a.u.^{-1}, the threshold intensities are highly sensitive to the window choice: a 30% change in the sum alters I_t1 by several tens of percent, and a factor-of-two change can move I_t1 by more than a factor of two. The claimed match between I_t1 ≈ 5.5 TW/cm^2 and the 29 fs onset is therefore not an independent confirmation. Please provide a quantitative, dipole-weighted estimate of the effective transition regions or a robustness study over a range of δ_j.
  3. [Fig. 2 and Table I] No error bars, repeated measurements, or shot-to-shot statistics are reported for the harmonic spectra, and no uncertainty is given for the intensity calibration (pulse energy, focal spot size, pulse duration). The central quantitative claims are threshold intensities (~6 and ~30 TW/cm^2), so without an uncertainty estimate it is not possible to judge whether the 22 vs 30 TW/cm^2 discrepancy is statistically significant. The authors should report at least the spread of measured spectra and the estimated systematic uncertainty of the intensity scale.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Main text and SI Eq. (1)] The formula is attributed to "Lamor" rather than "Larmor" in both the main text and the supplementary material.
  2. [SI Sec. II] The periodicity assumption j(t) ≈ j(t + 2π/ω_L) is an approximation, and the SI acknowledges that long-trajectory accumulation and ground-state depletion break it; this caveat should appear in the main text where the intercycle analysis is used to interpret Fig. 2.
  3. [SI Sec. III, Fig. 3] The transition dipole plots are normalized per panel, which prevents cross-panel comparison of absolute dipole strengths; an absolute scale would make the corroboration of δ_Γ and δ_X more convincing.
  4. [SI Sec. III] The statement that all conclusions are robust to the choice of exchange-correlation functional is not accompanied by any LDA results; either show the supporting calculations or soften the claim.
  5. [Abstract and conclusion] The phrase "before decoherence can suppress coherent emission" is presented as an explanation, but the TDDFT calculations do not include electron–electron scattering decoherence; this is an inference from timing rather than a computed result.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the threshold model is derived from band-structure inputs and external semiclassical ideas, then compared with the data rather than fitted to it.

full rationale

The central derivation chain is: (i) the intra/intercycle factorization is derived analytically in SI Sec. II via a Fourier transform, with the scaling N_c^2 and (N_c^2 - 1)^(-1/2) following directly from Eq. (2); this is independent of the present data. (ii) The threshold vector potentials A_t1 = (2π/a - δ_Γ - δ_X)/2 and A_t2 = 2A_t1 are constructed from the lattice constant, effective masses at Γ and X, and the estimate δ_k ≈ sqrt(m* ω_L) taken from Ref. [52], an external source. The δ values are then checked qualitatively against first-principles transition dipole elements (SI Fig. 3), but they are not adjusted to reproduce the harmonic spectra. (iii) The resulting intensities I_t1 ≈ 5.5 TW/cm^2 and I_t2 ≈ 22 TW/cm^2 are compared with the observed onset near 6 TW/cm^2 and the 5-fs reappearance above ~30 TW/cm^2. A discrepancy between I_t2 ≈ 22 and the observed ~30 is a quantitative robustness concern, not a circularity: the prediction is not forced by the data it is compared with. Self-citations (Refs. [5,32,36,38]) are present, but none is load-bearing: the 25-50 eV plateau is shown in the present Fig. 2, the Octopus code is a public independent resource, and the factorization is rederived in the SI. No equation in the paper reduces to its own input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The result rests on experimental spectra, TDDFT simulations, and a simplified momentum-space threshold model. No new physical entities are introduced. The thresholds are derived from band-structure inputs, but the transition-window sizes delta_Gamma and delta_X are estimates chosen by hand, and the periodic-current factorization is acknowledged as an approximation.

free parameters (3)
  • delta_Gamma momentum window radius = 0.05*pi a.u.-1
    Set by delta approximately sqrt(m*omega_L) with m*(Gamma)=0.36. Directly sets A_t1 and A_t2 and hence the claimed intensity thresholds. Not fitted to HHG data, but the choice of window size controls the threshold values.
  • delta_X momentum window radius = 0.07*pi a.u.-1
    Same estimate at X with m*(X)=0.90. Defines the Gamma-to-X half-cycle distance used in A_t1 and A_t2.
  • effective masses m*(Gamma), m*(X) = 0.36, 0.90
    Extracted from calculated band dispersion. Inputs to the delta estimates and thresholds. Not fitted to HHG data, but not independently measured.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math The acceleration theorem k(t)=k0+A(t) governs electron crystal momentum.
    Used to calculate whether electrons reach Gamma +/- delta_Gamma and X +/- delta_X within half or full cycles, as in Fig. 5 and the surrounding main text.
  • domain assumption Interband transitions occur predominantly in small momentum regions around Gamma for the first step and around X for the second step.
    Motivated by dipole matrix elements in SI Fig. 3, but treated as a selection rule; central to the threshold model.
  • ad hoc to paper The HHG current is periodic on the laser cycle, j(t) approximately j(t+2*pi/omega_L), for N_c cycles.
    SI Sec. II explicitly labels this an approximation and says quantitative agreement is not expected. It is used to derive intercycle peak broadening that explains the 17 fs plateau disappearance.
  • domain assumption Carrier-envelope phase effects can be neglected.
    Stated in the main text and SI Sec. III; acknowledged as potentially altering parts of the few-cycle response.
  • domain assumption The TB09 functional and pseudopotential approach captures the multiband dynamics, while decoherence from electron-electron scattering is absent.
    SI Sec. III states this; the paper notes the absence of decoherence as the likely reason for scaling mismatch between theory and experiment.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Pulse-Duration Control of Subcycle Multiband Electron Dynamics Extends the High-Harmonic Cutoff in a Light-Driven Insulator." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PQGBCARM

@misc{pith2026260806129,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Pulse-Duration Control of Subcycle Multiband Electron Dynamics Extends the High-Harmonic Cutoff in a Light-Driven Insulator},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PQGBCARM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.06129}
}
abstract

We demonstrate pathway-selective control of extreme-ultraviolet high-harmonic generation by jointly tuning laser pulse duration ($5$ - $29$ fs) and intensity ($0.8$ - $74$ TW/cm$^2$). Many-cycle pulses at moderate intensities, $\sim 6$ TW/cm$^2$, promote cumulative carrier transfer over successive optical cycles, progressively accessing higher conduction bands. In contrast, few-cycle, high-intensity, $\sim 22$ TW/cm$^2$, pulses drive subcycle multiband dynamics that reach $25$ - $50$ eV photon energies before decoherence can suppress coherent emission. These results reveal pulse duration and intensity as decisive control knobs for high-harmonic emission, opening a route to band-structure-guided pulse design for higher energy extreme-ultraviolet light sources.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.06129 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic of the laser system: the laser pulse is [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Simulated high-order harmonic spectra from MgO [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. FIG. 5. Fraction of initial valence band crystal momenta [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Pulse diagnostics of the driving beam. a) and b): Re [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png]
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Graphical illustration of Eq. (2) with (a) illustrat [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png]
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Magnitude of the transition dipole elements calcu [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Experimental harmonic spectrum of the MgO sample [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [32]

    Allegre, J

    H. Allegre, J. J. Broughton, T. Klee, Y. Li, K. M. Kowalczyk, N. Thatte, D. Lim, J. P. Marangos, M. M. Matthews, and J. W. G. Tisch, Extension of high- harmonic generation cutoff in solids to 50 eV using MgO, Optics Letters50, 1492 (2025)

    work page 2025

  2. [1]

    Ghimire, A

    S. Ghimire, A. D. DiChiara, E. Sistrunk, P. Agostini, L. F. DiMauro, and D. A. Reis, Observation of high-order harmonic generation in a bulk crystal, Nature Physics7, 138 (2011)

    2011

  3. [2]

    Goulielmakis and T

    E. Goulielmakis and T. Brabec, High harmonic gener- ation in condensed matter, Nature Photonics16, 411 (2022)

    work page 2022

  4. [3]

    P. J. van Essen, Z. Nie, B. de Keijzer, and P. M. Kraus, Toward Complete All-Optical Intensity Modulation of High-Harmonic Generation from Solids, ACS Photonics 11, 1832 (2024)

    work page 2024

  5. [4]

    A. A. Lanin, E. A. Stepanov, A. B. Fedotov, and A. M. Zheltikov, Mapping the electron band structure by intra- band high-harmonic generation in solids, Optica4, 516 (2017)

    2017

  6. [5]

    Nourbakhsh, N

    Z. Nourbakhsh, N. Tancogne-Dejean, H. Merdji, and A. Rubio, High harmonics and isolated attosecond pulses fromMgO, Phys. Rev. Appl.15, 014013 (2021)

    work page 2021

  7. [6]

    A. J. Uzan-Narovlansky, G. Orenstein, S. Shames, M.EvenTzur, O.Kneller, B.D.Bruner, T.Arusi-Parpar, O. Cohen, and N. Dudovich, Revealing the interplay be- tween strong field selection rules and crystal symmetries, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 223802 (2023)

    work page 2023

  8. [7]

    Z. Wang, H. Park, Y. H. Lai, J. Xu, C. I. Blaga, F. Yang, P. Agostini, and L. F. DiMauro, The roles of photo- carrier doping and driving wavelength in high harmonic generation from a semiconductor, Nature Communica- tions8, 1686 (2017)

    work page 2017

Show all 63 references
  1. [8]

    A. J. Uzan-Narovlansky, Á. Jiménez-Galán, G. Oren- stein, R. E. F. Silva, T. Arusi-Parpar, S. Shames, B. D. Bruner, B. Yan, O. Smirnova, M. Ivanov, and N. Du- dovich, Observation of light-driven band structure via multiband high-harmonic spectroscopy, Nature Photon- ics16, 428 (2022)

    2022

  2. [9]

    P. B. Corkum, Plasma perspective on strong field multi- photon ionization, Phys. Rev. Lett.71, 1994 (1993)

    1993

  3. [10]

    K. J. Schafer, B. Yang, L. F. DiMauro, and K. C. Ku- lander, Above threshold ionization beyond the high har- monic cutoff, Phys. Rev. Lett.70, 1599 (1993)

    1993

  4. [11]

    Vampa and T

    G. Vampa and T. Brabec, Merge of high harmonic gen- eration from gases and solids and its implications for at- tosecond science, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecu- lar and Optical Physics50, 083001 (2017)

    2017

  5. [12]

    Schubert, M

    O. Schubert, M. Hohenleutner, F. Langer, B. Urbanek, 6 C. Lange, U. Huttner, D. Golde, T. Meier, M. Kira, S. W. Koch, and R. Huber, Sub-cycle control of tera- hertz high-harmonic generation by dynamical Bloch os- cillations, Nature Photonics8, 119 (2014)

    2014

  6. [13]

    R.Zuo, A.Trautmann, G.Wang, W.-R.Hannes, S.Yang, X.Song, T.Meier, M.Ciappina, H.T.Duc,andW.Yang, Neighboring atom collisions in solid-state high harmonic generation, Ultrafast Science2021, 9861923 (2021)

    2021

  7. [14]

    Tancogne-Dejean, O

    N. Tancogne-Dejean, O. D. Mücke, F. X. Kärtner, and A.Rubio,Impactoftheelectronicbandstructureinhigh- harmonic generation spectra of solids, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 087403 (2017)

    2017

  8. [15]

    T. T. Luu, M. Garg, S. Y. Kruchinin, A. Moulet, M. T. Hassan, and E. Goulielmakis, Extreme ultraviolet high- harmonic spectroscopy of solids, Nature521, 498 (2015)

    2015

  9. [16]

    Brabec, High harmonic generation in solids: Real versus virtual transition channels, Phys

    A.Thorpe, N.Boroumand, A.M.Parks, E.Goulielmakis, and T. Brabec, High harmonic generation in solids: Real versus virtual transition channels, Phys. Rev. B107, 075135 (2023)

    2023

  10. [17]

    L.-M. Koll, S. V. B. Jensen, P. J. van Essen, B. de Kei- jzer, E. Olsson, J. Cottom, T. Witting, A. Husakou, M.J.J.Vrakking, L.B.Madsen, P.M.Kraus,andP.Jür- gens, Extreme ultraviolet high-harmonic interferometry of excitation-induced bandgap dynamics in solids, Op- tica12, 1606 (2025)

    2025

  11. [18]

    Tancogne-Dejean, M

    N. Tancogne-Dejean, M. A. Sentef, and A. Rubio, Ul- trafast modification of hubbardUin a strongly corre- lated material: Ab initio high-harmonic generation in nio, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 097402 (2018)

    2018

  12. [19]

    Lakhotia, H

    H. Lakhotia, H. Y. Kim, M. Zhan, S. Hu, S. Meng, and E. Goulielmakis, Laser picoscopy of valence electrons in solids, Nature583, 55 (2020)

    2020

  13. [20]

    Jia, X.-H

    G.-R. Jia, X.-H. Huang, and X.-B. Bian, Nonadiabatic redshifts in high-order harmonic generation from solids, Optics Express25, 23654 (2017)

    2017

  14. [21]

    A. M. Parks and M. Kolesik, Full brillouin zone, multi- bandreconstructionoftheelectronicstructurefromhigh- harmonic spectra, Opt. Express33, 13986 (2025)

    2025

  15. [22]

    T. T. Luu and H. J. Wörner, Measurement of the Berry curvatureofsolidsusinghigh-harmonicspectroscopy,Na- ture Communications9, 916 (2018)

    2018

  16. [23]

    M. R. Bionta, E. Haddad, A. Leblanc, V. Gruson, P. Las- sonde, H. Ibrahim, J. Chaillou, N. Émond, M. R. Otto, A.Jiménez-Galán, R.E.F.Silva, M.Ivanov, B.J.Siwick, M. Chaker, and F. Légaré, Tracking ultrafast solid-state dynamics using high harmonic spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. Res....

    2021

  17. [24]

    X. Liu, L. Li, X. Zhu, T. Huang, X. Zhang, D. Wang, P. Lan, and P. Lu, Wavelength dependence of high- order harmonic yields in solids, Phys. Rev. A98, 063419 (2018)

    2018

  18. [25]

    Y. S. You, D. A. Reis, and S. Ghimire, Anisotropic high- harmonic generation in bulk crystals, Nature Physics13, 345 (2017)

    2017

  19. [26]

    Westerberg, M

    S. Westerberg, M. Redon, A.-K. Raab, G. Beaufort, M. Arias Velasco, C. Guo, I. Sytcevich, R. Weissenbilder, D. O’Dwyer, P. Smorenburg, C. L. Arnold, A. L’Huillier, and A.-L. Viotti, Influence of the laser pulse duration in high-order harmonic generation, APL Photonics10, 096103 (2025)

    2025

  20. [27]

    Kolesik and J

    M. Kolesik and J. V. Moloney, Numerical discreteness and dephasing in high-harmonic calculations in solids, Phys. Rev. B108, 115433 (2023)

    2023

  21. [28]

    Hohenleutner, F

    M. Hohenleutner, F. Langer, O. Schubert, M. Knorr, U. Huttner, S. W. Koch, M. Kira, and R. Huber, Real- time observation of interfering crystal electrons in high- harmonic generation, Nature523, 572 (2015)

    2015

  22. [29]

    Langer, M

    F. Langer, M. Hohenleutner, C. P. Schmid, C. Poell- mann, P. Nagler, T. Korn, C. Schüller, M. S. Sherwin, U. Huttner, J. T. Steiner, S. W. Koch, M. Kira, and R. Huber, Lightwave-driven quasiparticle collisions on a subcycle timescale, Nature533, 225 (2016)

    2016

  23. [30]

    J. J. Broughton, H. Allegre, T. Klee, Y. Li, D. Lim, N. Thatte, M. M. Matthews, and J. W. G. Tisch, In- tensity control of few-cycle laser pulses, Applied Optics 64, 7060 (2025)

    2025

  24. [31]

    W. A. Okell, T. Witting, D. Fabris, D. Austin, M. Bo- coum, F. Frank, A. Ricci, A. Jullien, D. Walke, J. P. Marangos, R. Lopez-Martens, and J. W. G. Tisch, Carrier-envelope phase stability of hollow fibers used for high-energy few-cycle pulse generation, Optics Letters 38, 3918 (2013)

    2013

  25. [33]

    [5,34-48], for details on (I) pulse measurement, (II) intra- and intercycle analysis, (III) numerical methods, (IV) time-frequency analysis, and (V) comparison with theΓ−Kcase

    See Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher], which includes Refs. [5,34-48], for details on (I) pulse measurement, (II) intra- and intercycle analysis, (III) numerical methods, (IV) time-frequency analysis, and (V) comparison with theΓ−Kcase

  26. [34]

    D. G. Arbó, K. L. Ishikawa, K. Schiessl, E. Persson, and J. Burgdörfer, Intracycle and intercycle interferences in above-threshold ionization: The time grating, Phys. Rev. A81, 021403 (2010)

    2010

  27. [35]

    Hummert, M

    J. Hummert, M. Kubin, S. D. López, J. I. Fuks, F. Morales, M. J. J. Vrakking, O. Kornilov, and D. G. Arbó, Retrieving intracycle interference in angle- resolvedlaser-assistedphotoemissionfromargon,Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics53, 154003 (2020)

    2020

  28. [36]

    A.T.Andersen, S.V.B.Jensen,andL.B.Madsen,Intra- and intercycle analysis of intraband high-order harmonic generation, Phys. Rev. A109, 063109 (2024)

    2024

  29. [38]

    Tancogne-Dejean, M

    N. Tancogne-Dejean, M. J. T. Oliveira, X. Andrade, H. Appel, C. H. Borca, G. Le Breton, F. Buchholz, A. Castro, S. Corni, A. A. Correa, U. De Giovannini, A. Delgado, F. G. Eich, J. Flick, G. Gil, A. Gomez, N. Helbig, H. Hübener, R. Jestädt, J. Jornet-Somoza, A. H. Larsen, I. V...

    2020

  30. [39]

    Tancogne-Dejean, O

    N. Tancogne-Dejean, O. D. Mücke, F. X. Kärtner, and A. Rubio, Ellipticity dependence of high-harmonic gen- eration in solids originating from coupled intraband and interband dynamics, Nature Communications8, 745 (2017)

    2017

  31. [41]

    H. J. Monkhorst and J. D. Pack, Special points for 7 Brillouin-zone integrations, Phys. Rev. B13, 5188 (1976)

    1976

  32. [43]

    Waroquiers, A

    D. Waroquiers, A. Lherbier, A. Miglio, M. Stankovski, S. Poncé, M. J. T. Oliveira, M. Giantomassi, G.-M. Rignanese, and X. Gonze, Band widths and gaps from the Tran-Blaha functional: Comparison with many-body perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. B87, 075121 (2013)

    2013

  33. [47]

    Bian, and S.-W

    Y.W.Kim, T.-J.Shao, H.Kim, S.Han, S.Kim, M.Ciap- pina, X.-B. Bian, and S.-W. Kim, Spectral interference in high harmonic generation from solids, ACS Photonics 6, 851 (2019)

    2019

  34. [48]

    A. J. Uzan, G. Orenstein, Á. Jiménez-Galán, C. Mc- Donald, R. E. F. Silva, B. D. Bruner, N. D. Klimkin, V. Blanchet, T. Arusi-Parpar, M. Krüger, A. N. Rubtsov, O. Smirnova, M. Ivanov, B. Yan, T. Brabec, and N. Du- dovich, Attosecond spectral singularities in solid-state high-h...

    2020

  35. [49]

    M. Wu, D. A. Browne, K. J. Schafer, and M. B. Gaarde, Multilevelperspectiveonhigh-orderharmonicgeneration in solids, Phys. Rev. A94, 063403 (2016)

    2016

  36. [50]

    Y. S. You, Y. Yin, Y. Wu, A. Chew, X. Ren, F. Zhuang, S. Gholam-Mirzaei, M. Chini, Z. Chang, and S. Ghimire, High-harmonic generation in amorphous solids, Nature Communications8, 1 (2017)

    2017

  37. [51]

    Ndabashimiye, S

    G. Ndabashimiye, S. Ghimire, M. Wu, D. A. Browne, K. J. Schafer, M. B. Gaarde, and D. A. Reis, Solid- state harmonics beyond the atomic limit, Nature534, 520 (2016)

    2016

  38. [52]

    C.Yu, H.Iravani,andL.B.Madsen,Crystal-momentum- resolved contributions to multiple plateaus of high-order harmonic generation from band-gap materials, Phys. Rev. A102, 033105 (2020)

    2020

  39. [53]

    Vampa, C

    G. Vampa, C. R. McDonald, G. Orlando, P. B. Corkum, and T. Brabec, Semiclassical analysis of high harmonic generation in bulk crystals, Phys. Rev. B91, 064302 (2015). 8 Pulse-Duration Control of Subcycle Multiband Electron Dynamics Extends the High-Harmonic Cutoff in a Light-D...

    2015

  40. [54]

    D. G. Arb´ o, K. L. Ishikawa, K. Schiessl, E. Persson, and J. Burgd¨ orfer, Intracycle and intercycle interferences in above-threshold ionization: The time grating, Phys. Rev. A81, 021403 (2010)

    2010

  41. [55]

    Hummert, M

    J. Hummert, M. Kubin, S. D. L´ opez, J. I. Fuks, F. Morales, M. J. J. Vrakking, O. Kornilov, and D. G. Arb´ o, Retrieving intracycle interference in angle- resolved laser-assisted photoemission from argon, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics53, 154003 (2020)

    2020

  42. [56]

    A. T. Andersen, S. V. B. Jensen, and L. B. Madsen, Intra- and intercycle analysis of intraband high-order harmonic generation, Phys. Rev. A109, 063109 (2024)

    2024

  43. [57]

    J. D. Jackson,Classical electrodynamics, 3rd ed. (Wiley, New York, NY, 1998)

    1998

  44. [58]

    Tancogne-Dejean, M

    N. Tancogne-Dejean, M. J. T. Oliveira, X. Andrade, H. Appel, C. H. Borca, G. Le Breton, F. Buchholz, A. Castro, S. Corni, A. A. Correa, U. De Giovannini, A. Delgado, F. G. Eich, J. Flick, G. Gil, A. Gomez, N. Helbig, H. H¨ ubener, R. Jest¨ adt, J. Jornet-Somoza, A. H. Larsen, ...

    2020

  45. [59]

    Tancogne-Dejean, O

    N. Tancogne-Dejean, O. D. M¨ ucke, F. X. K¨ artner, and A. Rubio, Ellipticity dependence of high-harmonic gen- eration in solids originating from coupled intraband and interband dynamics, Nature Communications8, 745 (2017)

    2017

  46. [60]

    Hartwigsen, S

    C. Hartwigsen, S. Goedecker, and J. Hutter, Relativistic separable dual-space gaussian pseudopotentials from H to Rn, Phys. Rev. B58, 3641 (1998)

    1998

  47. [61]

    H. J. Monkhorst and J. D. Pack, Special points for Brillouin-zone integrations, Phys. Rev. B13, 5188 (1976)

    1976

  48. [62]

    Tran and P

    F. Tran and P. Blaha, Accurate band gaps of semiconduc- tors and insulators with a semilocal exchange-correlation potential, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 226401 (2009)

    2009

  49. [63]

    Waroquiers, A

    D. Waroquiers, A. Lherbier, A. Miglio, M. Stankovski, S. Ponc´ e, M. J. T. Oliveira, M. Giantomassi, G.-M. Rignanese, and X. Gonze, Band widths and gaps from the Tran-Blaha functional: Comparison with many-body perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. B87, 075121 (2013)

    2013

  50. [64]

    Whited, C

    R. Whited, C. J. Flaten, and W. Walker, Exciton ther- moreflectance of MgO and CaO, Solid State Communi- cations13, 1903 (1973)

    1973

  51. [65]

    Ikemachi, Y

    T. Ikemachi, Y. Shinohara, T. Sato, J. Yumoto, M. Kuwata-Gonokami, and K. L. Ishikawa, Time- dependent Hartree-Fock study of electron-hole interac- tion effects on high-order harmonic generation from pe- riodic crystals, Phys. Rev. A98, 023415 (2018)

    2018

  52. [66]

    R. E. F. Silva, I. V. Blinov, A. N. Rubtsov, O. Smirnova, and M. Ivanov, High-harmonic spectroscopy of ultrafast many-body dynamics in strongly correlated systems, Na- ture Photonics12, 266 (2018)

    2018

  53. [67]

    Y. W. Kim, T.-J. Shao, H. Kim, S. Han, S. Kim, M. Ciap- pina, X.-B. Bian, and S.-W. Kim, Spectral interference in high harmonic generation from solids, ACS Photonics 6, 851 (2019)

    2019

  54. [68]

    Nourbakhsh, N

    Z. Nourbakhsh, N. Tancogne-Dejean, H. Merdji, and A. Rubio, High harmonics and isolated attosecond pulses from MgO, Phys. Rev. Appl.15, 014013 (2021)

    2021

  55. [69]

    A. J. Uzan, G. Orenstein, ´A. Jim´ enez-Gal´ an, C. Mc- Donald, R. E. F. Silva, B. D. Bruner, N. D. Klimkin, V. Blanchet, T. Arusi-Parpar, M. Kr¨ uger, A. N. Rubtsov, O. Smirnova, M. Ivanov, B. Yan, T. Brabec, and N. Du- dovich, Attosecond spectral singularities in solid-state...

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.