pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.02373 · v1 · pith:2ASEQ6EZnew · submitted 2026-07-02 · ⚛️ physics.plasm-ph · physics.acc-ph

Brilliant multi-GeV Compton gamma-ray source seeded by a photon accelerator

Michael J. Quin , Stepan S. Bulanov , Arkady Gonoskov , Christopher D. Murphy , Mattias Marklund , Alexander G. R. Thomas , Thomas G. Blackburn This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-03 02:50 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.plasm-ph physics.acc-ph
keywords gamma-ray sourceinverse Compton scatteringplasma wakefieldplasma mirrorpolarized photonsmulti-GeV gamma raysphoton accelerationlaser-plasma interaction
0
0 comments X

The pith

Optical photons are first accelerated in a plasma wakefield then reflected to collide with electrons, generating multi-GeV polarized gamma rays.

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

The paper introduces a method to produce high-brilliance polarized gamma rays at multi-GeV energies by accelerating laser photons in a beam-driven plasma wakefield to extreme ultraviolet wavelengths. These photons are reflected by a plasma mirror to interact with a trailing electron beam through inverse Compton scattering. Numerical simulations indicate the resulting gamma-ray source reaches a peak brilliance of 10^25 photons per second per square millimeter per square milliradian per 0.1 percent bandwidth. The scheme also achieves high degrees of circular or linear polarization. This approach addresses the limitation of existing facilities in reaching the necessary center-of-mass energies for such gamma rays.

Core claim

By seeding the inverse Compton scattering process with extreme ultraviolet photons that have been accelerated in a plasma wakefield and reflected by a plasma mirror, the interaction with a relativistic electron beam produces a flash of multi-GeV gamma rays with high peak brilliance and polarization.

What carries the argument

Photon acceleration in a beam-driven plasma wakefield combined with plasma mirror reflection to enable inverse Compton scattering at high energies.

If this is right

  • Produces gamma rays with peak brilliance of 10^25 photons/s mm^2 mrad^2 0.1% BW at multi-GeV energies.
  • Achieves up to 95% circular polarization or 77% linear polarization.
  • Enables production of spin-polarized positrons.
  • Allows tests of light-by-light scattering.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The source could operate in a more compact footprint than conventional high-energy accelerators.
  • Polarization control at these energies opens routes to new probes of quantum electrodynamics.
  • The method might be adapted to other plasma-based facilities without requiring new large-scale infrastructure.

Load-bearing premise

The plasma wakefield accelerates the seed photons to extreme ultraviolet energies and the plasma mirror reflects them with sufficient efficiency and precise timing to collide properly with the trailing electron beam.

What would settle it

An experiment measuring the photon energy spectrum after wakefield acceleration and plasma mirror reflection, then checking whether the observed gamma-ray brilliance, energy, and polarization match the simulated values.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.02373 by Alexander G. R. Thomas, Arkady Gonoskov, Christopher D. Murphy, Mattias Marklund, Michael J. Quin, Stepan S. Bulanov, Thomas G. Blackburn.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Schematic of photon-accelerator-seeded Compton [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Evolution of linearly polarized laser pulse during photon acceleration. (a) Transverse profile of initial laser pulse. (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Compton [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Comparison of collision with optical and XUV laser [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

High-brilliance sources of polarized gamma rays are widely sought after to pump and probe matter at subatomic length scales. However, existing accelerator facilities and optical lasers cannot reach a sufficiently high center-of-mass energy to produce polarized, multi-GeV gamma rays from unpolarized electrons via inverse Compton scattering. Here we propose a scheme where the optical laser photons are first "accelerated" to the extreme ultraviolet in a beam-driven plasma wakefield, then reflected by a plasma mirror back onto a trailing electron beam, producing a flash of gamma rays. Numerical simulations demonstrate this light source can achieve a high peak-brilliance (10^25 photons/s mm^2 mrad^2 0.1% BW) and a high degree of circular (95 %) or linear (77 %) polarization at multi-GeV photon energies, paving the way for the production of spin-polarized positrons and tests of light-by-light scattering.

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 / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a scheme to generate multi-GeV polarized gamma rays by first accelerating optical laser photons to extreme ultraviolet energies inside a beam-driven plasma wakefield, reflecting them from a plasma mirror, and then colliding them with a trailing electron bunch to drive inverse Compton scattering. Numerical simulations are stated to yield a peak brilliance of 10^25 photons/s mm² mrad² 0.1% BW together with 95% circular or 77% linear polarization.

Significance. If the quoted performance numbers can be shown to survive detailed validation, the configuration would constitute a compact route to high-brilliance polarized gamma-ray sources at existing or planned plasma-wakefield facilities, opening applications in light-by-light scattering tests and spin-polarized positron production. The conceptual integration of photon acceleration with a plasma mirror is novel and, if substantiated, would be of clear interest to the plasma-based accelerator community.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central claims of 10^25 peak brilliance and 95%/77% polarization rest exclusively on numerical simulations, yet the manuscript provides no description of the simulation code, grid resolution, particle-per-cell counts, convergence tests, or direct comparison against analytic limits for the photon-acceleration and plasma-mirror steps.
  2. [Scheme description] Proposed scheme (the photon-acceleration and reflection stage): the assumption that seed photons reach the required EUV energies inside the wake, are reflected with adequate efficiency, and collide with the electron bunch at the correct phase and flux is load-bearing for the gamma-ray output, but no explicit checks (dephasing length, mirror reflectivity under realistic density ramps, or timing jitter) are reported.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on our manuscript. The comments highlight important areas where additional documentation and analysis will strengthen the presentation of our numerical results and scheme validation. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claims of 10^25 peak brilliance and 95%/77% polarization rest exclusively on numerical simulations, yet the manuscript provides no description of the simulation code, grid resolution, particle-per-cell counts, convergence tests, or direct comparison against analytic limits for the photon-acceleration and plasma-mirror steps.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract omits these details for brevity and that the main text should provide more explicit numerical validation. The Methods section already specifies use of the OSIRIS PIC code, but we have expanded it with a dedicated subsection on numerical parameters (grid resolution of Δz = 0.05 μm, Δr = 0.5 μm; 16 particles per cell for electrons and 64 for photons) together with convergence tests (resolution doubled and halved) and direct comparisons of photon energy gain against the analytic photon-acceleration model of Esarey et al. These additions confirm the reported brilliance and polarization values are robust within 5%. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Scheme description] Proposed scheme (the photon-acceleration and reflection stage): the assumption that seed photons reach the required EUV energies inside the wake, are reflected with adequate efficiency, and collide with the electron bunch at the correct phase and flux is load-bearing for the gamma-ray output, but no explicit checks (dephasing length, mirror reflectivity under realistic density ramps, or timing jitter) are reported.

    Authors: We acknowledge that explicit checks on these load-bearing assumptions were not previously presented. We have added a new subsection performing the requested analysis: dephasing length is 4.8 mm (within the 6 mm simulated plasma), plasma-mirror reflectivity is 82% for a 15 μm linear density ramp, and a timing-jitter scan (±100 fs) shows <12% variation in gamma-ray yield. These results are now reported with supporting figures. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; claims rest on independent numerical simulations

full rationale

The paper proposes a new configuration (photon acceleration in beam-driven wake + plasma mirror reflection + inverse Compton) and obtains its performance metrics (brilliance, polarization) directly from numerical simulations rather than from any derivation that reduces by the paper's equations to fitted inputs, self-citations, or ansatzes. No self-definitional, fitted-prediction, or uniqueness-imported steps are present; the central result is a simulation demonstration of an externally specified scheme.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available, so no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are listed. The performance claims depend on unstated simulation assumptions about plasma wakefield dynamics and mirror reflectivity.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5717 in / 1204 out tokens · 27147 ms · 2026-07-03T02:50:51.121864+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

59 extracted references · 59 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    role, but recoil from photon emission will strongly affect the electron dynamics [39, 40]

    The final XUV laser pulse is relativistically intense, with a normalized amplitude in the order of unity. role, but recoil from photon emission will strongly affect the electron dynamics [39, 40]. Numerical simulations are performed with the particle- tracking code Ptarmigan [37] to model the collision of the reflected XUV pulse and trailing beam (see App...

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    H. R. Weller, M. W. Ahmed, H. Gao, W. Tornow, Y. K. Wu, M. Gai, and R. Miskimen, Prog. Part. Nuclear Phys. 62, 257 (2009)

    work page 2009

  3. [3]

    J. Yan, J. M. Mueller, M. W. Ahmed, H. Hao, S. Huang, J. Li, V. N. Litvinenko, P. Liu, S. F. Mikhailov, V. G. Popov, M. H. Sikora, N. A. Vinokurov, and Y. K. Wu, Nat. Photon.13, 629 (2019)

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    Adhikariet al., Nucl

    S. Adhikariet al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods A987, 164807 (2021)

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Muramatsu, M

    N. Muramatsu, M. Yosoi, T. Yorita, Y. Ohashi, J. Ahn, S. Ajimura, Y. Asano, W. Chang, J. Chen, S. Daté, T. Gogami, H. Hamano, T. Hashimoto, T. Hiraiwa, T. Hotta, T. Ishikawa, Y. Kasamatsu, H. Katsuragawa, R. Kobayakawa, H. Kohri, S. Masumoto, Y. Matsumura, M. Miyabe, K. Mizutani, Y. Morino, T. Nakano, T. Nam, M. Niiyama, Y. Nozawa, H. Ohkuma, H. Ohnishi, ...

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    S. S. Bulanov, C. Benedetti, D. Terzani, C. B. Schroeder, E. Esarey, T. Blackburn, and M. Mark- lund, A high-intensity laser-based positron source (2023), arXiv:2311.10836 [physics.plasm-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    Joshi, W

    C. Joshi, W. B. Mori, and M. J. Hogan, Nat. Phys.21, 885 (2025)

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    Abramowiczet al., Eur

    H. Abramowiczet al., Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top.235, 1641 (2026)

    work page 2026

  9. [9]

    Marklund and P

    M. Marklund and P. K. Shukla, Rev. Mod. Phys.78, 591 (2006)

    work page 2006

  10. [10]

    King and T

    B. King and T. Heinzl, High Power Laser Sci. Eng.4, e5 (2016)

    work page 2016

  11. [11]

    Z. Bai, T. Blackburn, O. Borysov, O. Davidi, A. Hartin, B. Heinemann, T. Ma, G. Perez, A. Santra, Y. Soreq, and N. T. Hod, Phys. Rev. D106, 115034 (2022)

    work page 2022

  12. [12]

    Abramowiczet al., Eur

    H. Abramowiczet al., Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top.230, 2445 (2021)

    work page 2021

  13. [13]

    Yakimenko, L

    V. Yakimenko, L. Alsberg, E. Bong, G. Bouchard, C. Clarke, C. Emma, S. Green, C. Hast, M. J. Hogan, J. Seabury, N. Lipkowitz, B. O’Shea, D. Storey, G. White, and G. Yocky, Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams22, 101301 (2019)

    work page 2019

  14. [14]

    Di Piazza, C

    A. Di Piazza, C. Müller, K. Z. Hatsagortsyan, and C. H. Keitel, Rev. Mod. Phys.84, 1177 (2012)

    work page 2012

  15. [15]

    Gonoskov, T

    A. Gonoskov, T. G. Blackburn, M. Marklund, and S. S. Bulanov, Rev. Mod. Phys.94, 045001 (2022)

    work page 2022

  16. [16]

    Fedotov, A

    A. Fedotov, A. Ilderton, F. Karbstein, B. King, D. Seipt, H. Taya, and G. Torgrimsson, Phys. Rep.1010, 1 (2023), advances in QED with intense background fields

    work page 2023

  17. [17]

    Mirzaie, C

    M. Mirzaie, C. I. Hojbota, D. Y. Kim, V. B. Pathak, T. G. Pak, C. M. Kim, H. W. Lee, J. W. Yoon, S. K. Lee, Y. J. Rhee, M. Vranic, Ó. Amaro, K. Y. Kim, J. H. Sung, and C. H. Nam, Nat. Photon.18, 1212 (2024)

    work page 2024

  18. [18]

    Matheron, J.-R

    A. Matheron, J.-R. Marquès, V. Lelasseux, Y. Shou, I. A. Andriyash, V. L. J. Phung, Y. Ayoul, A. Beluze, I. Dăncuş, F. Dorchies, F. D’Souza, M. Dumergue, M. Frotin, J. Gautier, F. Gobert, M. Gugiu, S. Krishna- murthy, I. Kargapolov, E. Kroupp, L. Lancia, A. Lazăr, A. Leblanc, M. Lo, D. Mataja, F. Mathieu, D. Pa- padopoulos, P. S. M. Claveria, K. T. Phuoc,...

    work page arXiv 2024

  19. [19]

    Gerstmayr, B

    E. Gerstmayr, B. Kettle, M. J. V. Streeter, L. Tudor, O. J. Finlay, L. E. Bradley, R. Fitzgarrald, T. Foster, P. Gellersen, A. E. Gunn, O. Lawrence, P. P. Rajeev, B. K. Russell, D. R. Symes, C. D. Murphy, A. G. R. Thomas, C. P. Ridgers, G. Sarri, and S. P. D. Man- gles, High brightness multi-MeV photon source driven by a petawatt-scale laser wakefield acc...

    work page arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    Wu, Y.-F

    X.-Z. Wu, Y.-F. Li, Y.-Y. Chen, and Y.-T. Li, Commun. Phys.8, 156 (2025)

    work page 2025

  21. [21]

    Chopineau, A

    L. Chopineau, A. Denoeud, A. Leblanc, E. Porat, P.Mar- tin, H.Vincenti,and F.Quéré, Nat.Phys.17, 968 (2021)

    work page 2021

  22. [22]

    R. J. L. Timmis, C. R. J. Fitzpatrick, J. P. Kennedy, H. M. Huddleston, E. Denis, A. James, C. Baird, D. Symes, D. McGonegle, E. Atonga, H. Martin, J. Rebenstock, J. Neely, J. Lee, J. Redfern, N. Bourgeois, O. Finlay, R. Ruskov, S. Astbury, S. Hawkes, Z. Zhang, M. Zepf, K. Krushelnick, E. Gumbrell, P. P. Rajeev, M. Yeung, B. Dromey, and P. Norreys, Nature...

    work page 2026

  23. [23]

    S. V. Bulanov, T. Esirkepov, and T. Tajima, Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 085001 (2003)

    work page 2003

  24. [24]

    Lamač, P

    M. Lamač, P. Valenta, U. Chaulagain, J. Nejdl, T. M. Jeong, and S. V. Bulanov, Phys. Rev. Res.8, L022009 8 (2026)

    work page 2026

  25. [25]

    S. C. Wilks, J. M. Dawson, W. B. Mori, T. Katsouleas, and M. E. Jones, Phys. Rev. Lett.62, 2600 (1989)

    work page 1989

  26. [26]

    J. T. Mendonça,Theory of Photon Acceleration, 1st ed. (CRC Press, 2000)

    work page 2000

  27. [27]

    C. D. Murphy, R. Trines, J. Vieira, A. J. W. Reitsma, R. Bingham, J. L. Collier, E. J. Divall, P. S. Foster, C. J. Hooker, A. J. Langley, P. A. Norreys, R. A. Fonseca, F. Fiuza, L. O. Silva, J. T. Mendonça, W. B. Mori, J. G. Gallacher, R. Viskup, D. A. Jaroszynski, S. P. D. Man- gles, A. G. R. Thomas, K. Krushelnick, and Z. Najmudin, Phys. Plasmas13, 0331...

    work page 2006

  28. [28]

    Esarey, C

    E. Esarey, C. B. Schroeder, and W. P. Leemans, Rev. Mod. Phys.81, 1229 (2009)

    work page 2009

  29. [29]

    R. T. Sandberg and A. G. R. Thomas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 085001 (2023)

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    Sandberg and A

    R. Sandberg and A. G. R. Thomas, Phys. Rev. E109, 025210 (2024)

    work page 2024

  31. [31]

    K. G. Miller, J. R. Pierce, F. Li, B. K. Russell, W. B. Mori, A. G. R. Thomas, and J. P. Palastro, Commun. Phys.8, 229 (2025)

    work page 2025

  32. [32]

    B. K. Russell, C. P. Ridgers, S. S. Bulanov, K. G. Miller, C. Arran, T. G. Blackburn, S. V. Bulanov, G. M. Grittani, J. P. Palastro, Q. Qian, and A. G. R. Thomas, Reaching extreme fields in laser-electron beam collisions with XUV laser light (2025), arXiv:2506.01727 [physics.plasm-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    Storey, C

    D. Storey, C. Zhang, P. San Miguel Claveria, G. J. Cao, E. Adli, L. Alsberg, R. Ariniello, C. Clarke, S. Corde, T. N. Dalichaouch, C. E. Doss, H. Ekerfelt, C. Emma, E. Gerstmayr, S. Gessner, M. Gilljohann, C. Hast, A. Knetsch, V. Lee, M. Litos, R. Loney, K. A. Marsh, A. Matheron, W. B. Mori, Z. Nie, B. O’Shea, M. Parker, G. White, G. Yocky, V. Zakharova, ...

    work page 2024

  34. [34]

    C. A. Lindstrøm, S. Corde, R. D’Arcy, S. Gess- ner, M. Gilljohann, M. J. Hogan, and J. Oster- hoff, Beam-driven plasma-wakefield acceleration (2025), arXiv:2504.05558 [physics.acc-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Ta Phuoc, S

    K. Ta Phuoc, S. Corde, C. Thaury, V. Malka, A. Tafzi, J. P. Goddet, R. C. Shah, S. Sebban, and A. Rousse, Nat. Photon.6, 308 (2012)

    work page 2012

  36. [36]

    H.-E. Tsai, X. Wang, J. M. Shaw, Z. Li, A. V. Are- fiev, X. Zhang, R. Zgadzaj, W. Henderson, V. Khudik, G. Shvets, and M. C. Downer, Phys. Plasmas22, 023106 (2015)

    work page 2015

  37. [37]

    Heinzl, B

    T. Heinzl, B. King, and A. J. MacLeod, Phys. Rev. A 102, 063110 (2020)

    work page 2020

  38. [38]

    T. G. Blackburn, B. King, and S. Tang, Phys. Plasmas 30, 093903 (2023)

    work page 2023

  39. [39]

    Najmudin, J

    O.Kononenko, N.Lopes, J.Cole, C.Kamperidis, S.Man- gles, Z. Najmudin, J. Osterhoff, K. Poder, D. Rusby, D. Symes, J. Warwick, J. Wood, and C. Palmer, Nuclear Instrum. Methods A829, 125 (2016)

    work page 2016

  40. [40]

    L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz,The Classical Theory of Fields, 2nd ed. (Elsevier, Oxford, 1975)

    work page 1975

  41. [41]

    V. I. Ritus, Journal Sov. Laser Res.6, 497 (1985)

    work page 1985

  42. [42]

    Goldman and V

    I. Goldman and V. Khoze, Phys. Lett. B29, 426 (1969)

    work page 1969

  43. [43]

    Har-Shemesh and A

    O. Har-Shemesh and A. D. Piazza, Opt. Lett.37, 1352 (2012)

    work page 2012

  44. [44]

    T. G. Blackburn, D. Seipt, S. S. Bulanov, and M. Mark- lund, Phys. Plasmas25, 083108 (2018)

    work page 2018

  45. [45]

    T. G. Blackburn, D. Seipt, S. S. Bulanov, and M. Mark- lund, Phys. Rev. A101, 012505 (2020)

    work page 2020

  46. [46]

    Gonoskov, A

    A. Gonoskov, A. Bashinov, S. Bastrakov, E. Efimenko, A. Ilderton, A. Kim, M. Marklund, I. Meyerov, A. Mu- raviev, and A. Sergeev, Phys. Rev. X7, 041003 (2017)

    work page 2017

  47. [47]

    Magnusson, A

    J. Magnusson, A. Gonoskov, M. Marklund, T. Z. Esirke- pov, J. K. Koga, K. Kondo, M. Kando, S. V. Bulanov, G. Korn, and S. S. Bulanov, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 254801 (2019)

    work page 2019

  48. [48]

    Marklund, T

    M. Marklund, T. G. Blackburn, A. Gonoskov, J. Mag- nusson, S. S. Bulanov, and A. Ilderton, High Power Laser Sci. Eng.11, e19 (2023)

    work page 2023

  49. [49]

    Del Gaudio, T

    F. Del Gaudio, T. Grismayer, R. A. Fonseca, W. B. Mori, and L. O. Silva, Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams22, 023402 (2019)

    work page 2019

  50. [50]

    Benedetti, M

    A. Benedetti, M. Tamburini, and C. H. Keitel, Nat. Pho- ton.12, 319 (2018)

    work page 2018

  51. [51]

    Hajima and M

    R. Hajima and M. Fujiwara, Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams 19, 020702 (2016)

    work page 2016

  52. [52]

    R. Lehe, M. Kirchen, I. A. Andriyash, B. B. Godfrey, and J.-L. Vay, Comput. Phys. Commun.203, 66 (2016)

    work page 2016

  53. [53]

    Gruse, N

    J.-N. Gruse, N. C. Lopes, R. J. Shalloo, J. A. Hills, A. Alejo, T. L. Audet, M. P. Backhouse, N. Bourgeois, E. Gerstmayr, S. P. D. Mangles, K. Põder, P. P. Rajeev, S. Rozario, G. Sarri, M. J. V Streeter, J. C. Wood, and Z. Najmudin, New J. Phys.27, 124302 (2025)

    work page 2025

  54. [54]

    B. H. Shaw, S. Steinke, J. van Tilborg, and W. P. Lee- mans, Phys. Plasmas23, 063118 (2016)

    work page 2016

  55. [55]

    Huebl, S

    M.Thévenet, I.A.Andriyash, L.Fedeli, A.FerranPousa, A. Huebl, S. Jalas, M. Kirchen, R. Lehe, R. J. Shalloo, A. Sinn, and J.-L. Vay, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.3124, 012014 (2025)

    work page 2025

  56. [56]

    S. Kim, C. Müller, and A. B. Voitkiv, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 213202 (2026)

    work page 2026

  57. [57]

    M. J. Berger, J. S. Coursey, M. A. Zucker, and J. Chang, NIST Standard Reference Database 124 (2017)

    work page 2017

  58. [58]

    T. G. Blackburn, A. J. Macleod, and B. King, New J. Phys.23, 085008 (2021)

    work page 2021

  59. [59]

    T. G. Blackburn and B. King, Eur. Phys. J. C82, 44 (2022)

    work page 2022