Permanent Magnet Electron Optics for Low Energy Electron Systems: The Art of Extraordinary Performance from Ordinary Components

Ameya Patwardhan; Bas van der Geer; Jom Luiten; Julius Huijts

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 35 references

Permanent Magnet Electron Optics for Low Energy Electron Systems: The Art of Extraordinary Performance from Ordinary Components

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that a ring-shaped permanent magnet, positioned so its two field-free points coincide with the source and focus, can focus a 16.6 keV electron beam to sub-micrometer spot without the emittance growth that usually plagues s

desk verdict The permanent-magnet double-zero focusing design is a real contribution; the 90-electron headline rests on an unvalidated 10% longitudinal capture estimate and a constant-field DLA model. read the letter →

arxiv 2510.09831 v2 pith:4JTLUJMF submitted 2025-10-10 physics.acc-ph physics.app-phphysics.atom-ph

Ameya Patwardhan , Bas van der Geer , Jom Luiten , Julius Huijts This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.acc-phphysics.app-phphysics.atom-ph

keywords permanentmagnetopticsultracoldelectronsourcedielectriclaseraccelerationapparentemittancegrowthlow-energybeambunchchargeparticletrackinginjectordesign

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

Dielectric laser accelerators promise enormous accelerating gradients in chip-scale devices, but sub-relativistic versions have never carried more than a fraction of an electron per bunch. The authors propose an injector based on an ultracold electron source—a laser-cooled rubidium cloud photoionized just above threshold—and a permanent-magnet focusing system designed around the two field-free points of an axially magnetized ring. Because the source sits at one zero of the magnetic field and the focus at the other, the apparent emittance growth caused by starting and ending particles in a magnetic field is avoided, allowing a 16.6 keV beam to be focused to a 920 nm waist with 0.5 fC charge and 0.2% energy spread. Using a simple model for a dielectric laser accelerator, the authors estimate this translates to roughly 90 electrons per bunch at a 1 GV/m gradient, about two orders of magnitude above existing semiconductor-based injector expectations and four orders above demonstrated sub-relativistic DLA injection. If the estimate holds, the design would be the first practical high-charge injector for chip-scale laser accelerators.

What carries the argument

The key mechanism is the axially magnetized ring-shaped permanent magnet, whose axial field necessarily crosses zero at two points along the axis; positioning the electron source at the first zero and the focus at the second cancels the apparent emittance growth from nonzero starting and ending fields. The magnet shape is tuned via a genetic multi-objective optimization that yields Pareto fronts trading focal spot size against bunch charge, and the optimized design is discretized into tiled magnets to keep manufacturing practical.

What would settle it

Track the simulated 16.6 keV bunch through a realistic 3D electromagnetic field map of an actual fabricated dielectric laser accelerator structure (e.g., a dual-pillar or grating structure) instead of the constant-field box; if the fraction of particles reaching the end is below 3% at 1 GV/m, the estimated 90 electrons per bunch will not be reached.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a single axially magnetized ring-shaped permanent magnet can provide both the magnetic field needed for a grating magneto-optical trap and a focusing field that preserves emittance, because its axial field necessarily has two zeros. Placing the ultracold atom cloud at the first zero and the beam focus at the second cancels the apparent emittance growth that arises when electrons start or end in a nonzero magnetic field. Using a genetic multi-objective optimization of the magnet geometry and source parameters, the authors obtain a design that focuses a 16.6 keV beam to σ_r = 920 nm with 0.5 fC bunch charge and 0.2% energy spread, and they estimate this gives 90 (60)

Load-bearing premise

The promise of 90 electrons per bunch relies on assuming a dielectric laser accelerator behaves as a 100 µm constant-field channel with a 5×1 µm aperture and that at least 10% of the bunch is captured longitudinally—an assumption the paper states as an expectation rather than proving.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The injector would raise the expected bunch charge in sub-relativistic DLA experiments from far below one electron per bunch to about 90 electrons per bunch, enabling new studies of accelerator-on-a-chip physics.
The zero-field-at-source-and-focus design rule removes the need for bucking solenoids and magnetic shielding in compact keV beamlines, shrinking the beamline to about 12 cm and reducing space-charge effects.
The same optimized permanent-magnet approach can be applied to other high-brightness sub-relativistic devices, notably ultrafast electron diffraction, where short focal lengths and low emittance are critical.
At the tight focus the Rayleigh length exceeds the bunch length, so only a fraction of the bunch is tightly focused at any instant, making space-charge-induced emittance growth at the focus negligible.

Reading between the lines

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

The headline 90-electron number rests on a box model of DLA acceptance; tracking the same bunch through a realistic 3D field map of an actual dual-pillar or grating DLA could change both the transverse acceptance and the longitudinal capture, so the two-orders-of-magnitude gain should be read as an estimate to be tested rather than a guaranteed outcome.
The field-zero placement trick could be adapted to permanent-magnet arcs and transport lines at higher energies, where fringe fields at injection and extraction also cause emittance growth.
The injector's performance is tied to the ultracold source's repetition rate and vacuum complexity; porting the magnet concept to other bright cold-electron sources, such as cryocooled photocathodes, would broaden its applicability.
A direct experimental check would be to build the magnet assembly from off-the-shelf axially magnetized rings and measure the focal spot and emittance with a screen or camera, comparing against the simulated σ_r = 920 nm.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: the paper is worth reading for the magnet design. The idea of using the two field zeros of an axially polarized ring magnet to get B=0 at both source and focus is genuinely neat, and the optimization flow — genetic algorithm with Pareto fronts, multiple field-map solvers, tiled magnet practicalities, ion-dump layout — is solid engineering. The simulated focus of 920 nm rms at 16.6 keV with 0.5 fC and 0.2% energy spread is credible as a simulation result, and the discussion of Rayleigh length versus pulse length at the focus is sensible. So the injector-side claim, that an ultracold source can be focused into the few-micron aperture of a DLA structure, holds up.

The soft spot is Section VII. The 90-electron bunch charge is a product of a transverse acceptance from a constant-field 5x1 um box and an asserted 'at least 10%' longitudinal capture. That 10% appears without derivation or simulation. The box model also ignores the oscillatory, phase-dependent nature of DLA fields and the dephasing that occurs when 16.6 keV electrons gain energy in a real structure. At 1.4 ps bunch length and 10 um drive wavelength, the bunch spans ~40 optical cycles; longitudinal capture could easily be a few percent rather than ten. If it's 2%, the headline drops to ~18 electrons — still better than the SEM demonstration, but not two orders of magnitude. So the quantitative headline is unsupported as written. This is an addressable gap: a proper longitudinal phase-space acceptance calculation, ideally with a real DLA field map, would fix it.

The other issue is the metadata mismatch: the arXiv abstract describes a UED-oriented 12 cm beamline, while the manuscript's own abstract and conclusion are about the DLA injector and 90 electrons. That needs correction, but it's cosmetic.

I'd send this to peer review. The magnet concept deserves publication, and the DLA injection estimate, while rough, is an honest first pass that will improve with scrutiny. The authors are not hiding the ball — Section VII is clearly labeled a rough estimate. But the abstract shouldn't state the 90-electron number as a result until the longitudinal capture is better supported.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a low-energy (16.6 keV) injector for dielectric laser accelerators (DLAs) based on an ultracold electron source and a permanent-magnet focusing system. The design is engineered so that the longitudinal magnetic field vanishes at both the source and the focus, avoiding apparent emittance growth from starting or ending in a magnetic field; a genetic optimizer explores magnet geometries and source parameters, yielding a Pareto front. Particle tracking (GPT with CST, Traceon, and custom field maps) predicts a focal spot of sigma_r = 920 nm at 0.5 fC bunch charge, 0.2% energy spread, and 1.4 ps bunch length. A separate box-model estimate gives 90 (60) electrons per bunch injected into a 100-micron-long, 5x1-micron-aperture DLA at 1 GV/m (100 MV/m), assuming at least 10% longitudinal capture. The paper also discusses practical tiling and mitigation of manufacturing and alignment errors.

Significance. If the simulation results are confirmed, the permanent-magnet focusing design would be a simple and compact way to obtain few-mm focal lengths and sub-micron focal spots without canonical-angular-momentum emittance growth, with clear applications to UED and DLA injectors. The paper's strengths are the use of multiple independent field-map solvers, the explicit multi-objective Pareto treatment, the magnetization-independent zero-field property, and the attention to practical manufacturing tolerances. The predicted 60-90 electrons per DLA bunch would be a substantial advance over demonstrated sub-relativistic DLA injection, but that headline number currently rests on an unquantified longitudinal-capture assumption and a simplified constant-field model.

major comments (2)

[Section VII] The headline 90 (60) electrons per bunch is the product of a transverse acceptance from a constant-field 5x1 micron box and the statement 'We expect ... at least 10% of the beam be picked up longitudinally.' The 10% figure is not derived or simulated. The box model also ignores the oscillatory, phase-dependent nature of DLA fields and dephasing: at 16.6 keV and 1 GV/m over 100 microns, gamma*beta changes by about a factor of 2.8, so the accelerating phase is not preserved in a constant-field model. Since the claimed charge scales linearly with this fraction, please replace the assumption with a simulation of longitudinal acceptance in a realistic DLA field (including phase velocity and dephasing), or report the sensitivity and explicitly label the claim as an order-of-magnitude estimate.
[Section VI.A and Section VIII] The quoted focal spot and bunch charge are produced by the same genetic optimizer that selected the magnet geometry and source parameters, so they are not independent predictions. The Pareto fronts were generated with a 100-macro-particle space-charge model, and Section VIII states that the plotted <r> values differ from the fine-grained values quoted in the text. No convergence or tolerance analysis is given. Please report the optimized source and magnet parameters, the fine-grained simulation settings (particle count, field-map resolution), and a sensitivity study around the selected design so the reader can judge the robustness of the 920 nm / 0.5 fC result.

minor comments (5)

[Abstract] The abstract states the bunch charge is increased by 'about two orders of magnitude,' while Section VII says it is 'four orders of magnitude higher' than the demonstrated sub-relativistic DLA result. Please reconcile these numbers.
[Fig. 4] The Pareto front figure needs labeled axes with units, and the selected design point (black dot) should be explicitly marked in the printed figure.
[Fig. 6] The caption appears truncated ('Injection into the dielectric laser accelerator' with no further description). Complete the caption and define the plotted quantities.
[Section V.B] The claim that a 10% magnet-strength error can be accommodated by tuning the accelerating potential is not self-evident, since the zero-field locations depend on geometry rather than magnetization magnitude. Please explain the compensation mechanism and show the resulting effect on focal spot size.
[Section VI.A] The 'custom elements' used in GPT are not described. Provide details or a reference so the multi-solver field-map check is reproducible.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the reported bunch charge is a forward calculation from explicitly stated inputs, and the magnet performance is a directly simulated design output.

full rationale

The central claim, 90 (60) electrons per bunch, is an arithmetic product of three explicitly stated inputs: a chosen 0.5 fC source bunch charge, a simulated transverse acceptance of 0.33 (0.22), and an explicitly assumed longitudinal capture of 'at least 10%' (Section VII). None of these inputs is defined in terms of the 90-electron output, nor is any parameter fitted to reproduce that output. The 10% longitudinal-capture assumption is unsupported and may be wrong, but an uncertain or arbitrary input is a correctness risk, not circularity. Similarly, the 920 nm focal spot is the result of a genetic optimization followed by particle tracking with external field-map solvers; reporting the optimized design's performance is not equivalent to passing off a fitted input as a prediction. The paper's use of prior ultracold-electron-source parameters is a citation of published experimental results from the same group, which is external evidence rather than a self-citation chain. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz, or renaming is used to force the result. The derivation chain is transparent and linear: source charge x estimated efficiencies = expected charge. Therefore no circular step is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are postulated; the ring-magnet configuration is a design rather than an invented matter/force. The free parameters are all geometry, operating point, and source-shape choices fitted by the optimizer or selected by hand. The key axioms are the zero-field property of the magnet, the simplified DLA acceptance model, the 10% longitudinal capture assumption, and the adequacy of coarse space-charge modeling.

free parameters (5)

Magnet geometry parameters (two permanent magnets) = not specified in text; optimized by genetic algorithm
Section V.B: parametrized cross-sections and tiling of axially magnetized magnets were varied to minimize focal spot and maximize charge.
Source shape and volume extents = 30–100 µm (min/max extents)
Section V.B: source dimensions were allowed to vary in the optimization as an added degree of freedom.
Focal position = 115 mm downstream
Section V.B: focus was limited to 115 mm to keep the injector compact; this limit was selected because it gives the smallest focal spot.
Bunch charge operating point = 0.5 fC
Section V.B: chosen from the Pareto front as a conservative value 'readily achieved' with the current ultracold source.
Magnetic field gradient at source = 0.1–0.2 T/m
Section V.B: set by Rb magneto-optical trap requirements (trap size/density), not by beam-dynamics optimization.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption An axially magnetized ring-shaped permanent magnet guarantees two zeros of the axial magnetic field, whose locations depend only on geometry and not on magnetization strength.
Section III and Fig. 1: this is the foundation of the 'no apparent emittance growth' design. It is plausible magnetostatics, but not proven in the paper, and the later tiling with discrete magnets weakens the exact guarantee.
domain assumption A dielectric laser accelerator can be approximated by a constant DC field over 100 µm with a 5 µm × 1 µm transverse acceptance aperture.
Section VII: used to estimate transverse acceptance (0.33 at 1 GV/m, 0.22 at 100 MV/m). A real DLA structure has a more complex phase-space acceptance.
ad hoc to paper At least 10% of the beam will be picked up longitudinally by choosing the accelerating phase.
Section VII: stated as an expectation with no derivation or simulation; this assumption directly scales the headline 90-electron claim.
domain assumption A space-charge model with 100 macro particles is adequate for the optimization.
Section VIII: the authors note the Pareto-front values differ slightly from the fine-grained simulations, showing numerical sensitivity that is not quantified.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Permanent Magnet Electron Optics for Low Energy Electron Systems: The Art of Extraordinary Performance from Ordinary Components." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4JTLUJMF

@misc{pith2026251009831,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Permanent Magnet Electron Optics for Low Energy Electron Systems: The Art of Extraordinary Performance from Ordinary Components},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4JTLUJMF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2510.09831}
}

read the original abstract

Permanent magnet electron optics offer many advantages over electromagnets, and are being increasingly used in high-energy (GeV) electron accelerator designs. Here, we identify the advantages of permanent magnet electron optics for low-energy (keV) electron accelerators. We explore the applications of a class of designs based on axially magnetized permanent magnets, which offer a variety of advantages such as short focal lengths (few mm), while also preventing apparent emittance growth resulting from starting particles in a magnetic field. The proposed design philosophy is applied to an accelerator based on the ultracold electron source. The design is shown to be `emittance preserving' even for very short focal lengths (~5 mm) at an emittance level better than 1 nm-rad, while the short beamline (12 cm) limits space-charge effects. Two remedies for the mitigation of typical manufacturing and alignment challenges are considered. The performance of the design (related to parasitic aberrations) is enhanced by the proposed techniques. Applications of this design philosophy can improve the performance of ultrafast electron diffraction setups with minimal manufacturing effort.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.09831 by the authors.

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. Illustration of the proposed injector for dielectric [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. Trajectories of Rb [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (4 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Pareto fronts for different focal positions. Each [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Particle Tracking Results: The first plot shows the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. Injection into the dielectric laser accelerator [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7. Comparison of Pareto fronts [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references

[1]

R. Akre, D. Dowell, P. Emma, J. Frisch, S. Gile- vich, G. Hays, P. Hering, R. Iverson, C. Limborg- Deprey, H. Loos,et al., Commissioning the linac coher- ent light source injector, Physical Review Special Top- ics—Accelerators and Beams11, 030703 (2008)

2008
[2]

P. Emma, R. Akre, J. Arthur, R. Bionta, C. Bostedt, J. Bozek, A. Brachmann, P. Bucksbaum, R. Coffee, F.-J. Decker,et al., First lasing and operation of an ˚ angstrom- wavelength free-electron laser, nature photonics4, 641 (2010)

2010
[3]

B. J. Siwick, J. R. Dwyer, R. E. Jordan, and R. D. Miller, An atomic-level view of melting using femtosecond elec- tron diffraction, Science302, 1382 (2003)

2003
[4]

Van Oudheusden, P

T. Van Oudheusden, P. Pasmans, S. Van Der Geer, M. De Loos, M. Van Der Wiel, and O. Luiten, Com- pression of subrelativistic space-charge-dominated elec- tron bunches for single-shot femtosecond electron diffrac- tion, Physical review letters105, 264801 (2010)

2010
[5]

Filippetto, P

D. Filippetto, P. Musumeci, R. Li, B. J. Siwick, M. Otto, M. Centurion, and J. Nunes, Ultrafast electron diffrac- tion: Visualizing dynamic states of matter, Reviews of modern physics94, 045004 (2022)

2022
[6]

E. A. Peralta, K. Soong, R. J. England, E. R. Colby, Z. Wu, B. Montazeri, C. McGuinness, J. McNeur, K. J. Leedle, D. Walz, E. B. Sozer, B. Cowan, B. Schwartz, G. Travish, and R. L. Byer, Demonstration of electron ac- celeration in a laser-driven dielectric microstructure, Na- ture503, 91 (2013), publisher: Nature Publishing Group

2013
[7]

Breuer and P

J. Breuer and P. Hommelhoff, Laser-based acceleration of nonrelativistic electrons at a dielectric structure, Physical review letters111, 134803 (2013)

2013
[8]

R. J. England, R. J. Noble, K. Bane, D. H. Dowell, C.- K. Ng, J. E. Spencer, S. Tantawi, Z. Wu, R. L. Byer, E. Peralta,et al., Dielectric laser accelerators, Reviews of Modern Physics86, 1337 (2014)

2014

Show all 35 references

[9]

N. V. Sapra, K. Y. Yang, D. Vercruysse, K. J. Leedle, D. S. Black, R. J. England, L. Su, R. Trivedi, Y. Miao, O. Solgaard,et al., On-chip integrated laser-driven par- 8 ticle accelerator, Science367, 79 (2020)

2020
[10]

B. J. Claessens, S. B. van der Geer, G. Taban, E. J. D. Vredenbregt, and O. J. Luiten, Ultracold Electron Source, Physical Review Letters95, 164801 (2005), pub- lisher: American Physical Society

2005
[11]

J. G. H. Franssen, T. C. H. de Raadt, M. A. W. van Ninhuijs, and O. J. Luiten, Compact ultracold electron source based on a grating magneto-optical trap, Physi- cal Review Accelerators and Beams22, 023401 (2019), publisher: American Physical Society

2019
[12]

Deb, Multi-objective optimization, inSearch Method- ologies: Introductory Tutorials in Optimization and De- cision Support Techniques, edited by E

K. Deb, Multi-objective optimization, inSearch Method- ologies: Introductory Tutorials in Optimization and De- cision Support Techniques, edited by E. K. Burke and G. Kendall (Springer US, Boston, MA, 2005) pp. 273– 316

2005
[13]

Gonz´ alez-Iglesias, A

D. Gonz´ alez-Iglesias, A. Aksoy, D. Esperante, B. Gimeno, A. Latina, M. Boronat, C. Blanch, N. Fuster-Mart ´ ınez, P. Martinez-Reviriego, P. Mart ´ ın-Luna, and J. Fuster, X-band RF photoinjector design for the CompactLight project, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics ...

2021
[14]

Rosenzweig, A

J. Rosenzweig, A. Cahill, V. Dolgashev, C. Emma, A. Fukasawa, R. Li, C. Limborg, J. Maxson, P. Musumeci, A. Nause, R. Pakter, R. Pompili, R. Rous- sel, B. Spataro, and S. Tantawi, Next generation high brightness electron beams from ultrahigh field cryogenic rf photocathode sou...

2019
[15]

Dal Forno, V

M. Dal Forno, V. Dolgashev, G. Bowden, C. Clarke, M. Hogan, D. McCormick, A. Novokhatski, B. Spataro, S. Weathersby, and S. G. Tantawi, rf breakdown tests of mm-wave metallic accelerating structures, Physical Re- view Accelerators and Beams19, 011301 (2016), pub- lisher: Ameri...

2016
[16]

H. H. Braun, S. D¨ obert, I. Wilson, and W. Wuensch, Frequency and Temperature Dependence of Electrical Breakdown at 21, 30, and 39 GHz, Physical Review Let- ters90, 224801 (2003), publisher: American Physical So- ciety

2003
[17]

Loew and J

G. Loew and J. Wang, Field Emission and RF Breakdown in Copper Linac Structures (1989)

1989
[18]

Shiloh, J

R. Shiloh, J. Illmer, T. Chlouba, P. Yousefi, N. Sch¨ onenberger, U. Niedermayer, A. Mittelbach, and P. Hommelhoff, Electron phase-space control in photonic chip-based particle acceleration, Nature597, 498 (2021), publisher: Nature Publishing Group

2021
[19]

The expected injection ef- ficiency is estimated at below 20 %, leading to less than 6 electrons per bunch

a novel injector was proposed using silicon nano-tip photoemitters to achieve a small normalized emittance (and thus a small geometric emittance) even at moder- ate beam energies of 30 keV. The expected injection ef- ficiency is estimated at below 20 %, leading to less than 6 ...

2020
[20]

Hirano, K

T. Hirano, K. E. Urbanek, A. C. Ceballos, D. S. Black, Y. Miao, R. Joel England, R. L. Byer, and K. J. Leedle, A compact electron source for the dielectric laser accel- erator, Applied Physics Letters116, 161106 (2020)

2020
[21]

B. J. Claessens, M. P. Reijnders, G. Taban, O. J. Luiten, and E. J. D. Vredenbregt, Cold electron and ion beams generated from trapped atoms, Physics of Plasmas14, 093101 (2007)

2007
[22]

de Raadt, J

T. de Raadt, J. Franssen, and O. Luiten, Subpicosecond Ultracold Electron Source, Physical Review Letters130, 205001 (2023), publisher: American Physical Society

2023
[23]

Krenn, W

C. Krenn, W. Scherf, O. Khait, M. Musso, and L. Wind- holz, Stark effect investigations of resonance lines of neutral potassium, rubidium, europium and gallium, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik D Atoms, Molecules and Clusters 41, 229 (1997)

1997
[24]

Franssen,An ultracold and ultrafast electron source, Phd Thesis 1 (Research TU/e / Graduation TU/e), Tech- nische Universiteit Eindhoven, Eindhoven (2019), iSBN: 9789038647319

J. Franssen,An ultracold and ultrafast electron source, Phd Thesis 1 (Research TU/e / Graduation TU/e), Tech- nische Universiteit Eindhoven, Eindhoven (2019), iSBN: 9789038647319

2019
[25]

J. P. Cotter, J. P. McGilligan, P. F. Griffin, I. M. Rabey, K. Docherty, E. Riis, A. S. Arnold, and E. A. Hinds, Design and fabrication of diffractive atom chips for laser cooling and trapping, Applied Physics B122, 172 (2016)

2016
[26]

J. P. McGilligan, P. F. Griffin, R. Elvin, S. J. Ingleby, E. Riis, and A. S. Arnold, Grating chips for quantum technologies, Scientific Reports7, 384 (2017), publisher: Nature Publishing Group

2017
[27]

C. C. Nshii, M. Vangeleyn, J. P. Cotter, P. F. Griffin, E. A. Hinds, C. N. Ironside, P. See, A. G. Sinclair, E. Riis, and A. S. Arnold, A surface-patterned chip as a strong source of ultracold atoms for quantum technologies, Na- ture Nanotechnology8, 321 (2013), publisher: Nat...

2013
[28]

T. C. H. de Raadt,The ultracold electron source: from experiment to instrument, Phd Thesis 1 (Research TU/e / Graduation TU/e), Eindhoven University of Technol- ogy, Eindhoven (2024), iSBN: 9789038659190

2024
[29]

H. J. Metcalf and P. Van der Straten,Laser cooling and trapping(Springer Science & Business Media, 1999)

1999
[30]

S. Yoon, Y. Choi, S. Park, W. Ji, J.-H. Lee, and K. An, Characteristics of single-atom trapping in a magneto- optical trap with a high magnetic-field gradient, Journal of Physics: Conference Series80, 012046 (2007)

2007
[31]

Pulsar Physics, General Particle Tracer (2025)

2025
[32]

Voltrace, https://voltrace.io/ (2025)

2025
[33]

CST Studio Suite (2025)

2025
[34]

Niedermayer, T

U. Niedermayer, T. Egenolf, O. Boine-Frankenheim, and P. Hommelhoff, Alternating-Phase Focusing for Dielectric-Laser Acceleration, Physical Review Letters 121, 214801 (2018), publisher: American Physical So- ciety

2018
[35]

Br¨ uckner, T

L. Br¨ uckner, T. Chlouba, Y. Morimoto, N. Sch¨ onenberger, T. Shibuya, T. Siefke, U. D. Zeitner, and P. Hommelhoff, Mid-infrared dielectric laser acceleration in a silicon dual pillar structure, Optics Express32, 28348 (2024), publisher: Optica Publishing Group

2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

R. Akre, D. Dowell, P. Emma, J. Frisch, S. Gile- vich, G. Hays, P. Hering, R. Iverson, C. Limborg- Deprey, H. Loos,et al., Commissioning the linac coher- ent light source injector, Physical Review Special Top- ics—Accelerators and Beams11, 030703 (2008)

2008

[2] [2]

P. Emma, R. Akre, J. Arthur, R. Bionta, C. Bostedt, J. Bozek, A. Brachmann, P. Bucksbaum, R. Coffee, F.-J. Decker,et al., First lasing and operation of an ˚ angstrom- wavelength free-electron laser, nature photonics4, 641 (2010)

2010

[3] [3]

B. J. Siwick, J. R. Dwyer, R. E. Jordan, and R. D. Miller, An atomic-level view of melting using femtosecond elec- tron diffraction, Science302, 1382 (2003)

2003

[4] [4]

Van Oudheusden, P

T. Van Oudheusden, P. Pasmans, S. Van Der Geer, M. De Loos, M. Van Der Wiel, and O. Luiten, Com- pression of subrelativistic space-charge-dominated elec- tron bunches for single-shot femtosecond electron diffrac- tion, Physical review letters105, 264801 (2010)

2010

[5] [5]

Filippetto, P

D. Filippetto, P. Musumeci, R. Li, B. J. Siwick, M. Otto, M. Centurion, and J. Nunes, Ultrafast electron diffrac- tion: Visualizing dynamic states of matter, Reviews of modern physics94, 045004 (2022)

2022

[6] [6]

E. A. Peralta, K. Soong, R. J. England, E. R. Colby, Z. Wu, B. Montazeri, C. McGuinness, J. McNeur, K. J. Leedle, D. Walz, E. B. Sozer, B. Cowan, B. Schwartz, G. Travish, and R. L. Byer, Demonstration of electron ac- celeration in a laser-driven dielectric microstructure, Na- ture503, 91 (2013), publisher: Nature Publishing Group

2013

[7] [7]

Breuer and P

J. Breuer and P. Hommelhoff, Laser-based acceleration of nonrelativistic electrons at a dielectric structure, Physical review letters111, 134803 (2013)

2013

[8] [8]

R. J. England, R. J. Noble, K. Bane, D. H. Dowell, C.- K. Ng, J. E. Spencer, S. Tantawi, Z. Wu, R. L. Byer, E. Peralta,et al., Dielectric laser accelerators, Reviews of Modern Physics86, 1337 (2014)

2014