Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 86 references

Semiclassical analysis of axion-like particle emission via nonlinear Compton-like scattering in intense laser fields

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper derives a closed-form, electron spin-resolved axion emission rate in intense laser fields, and shows spin flips dominate along the motion and magnetic-field axes, exactly where photon emission preserves spin.

desk verdict The spin-resolved axion emission formula is a useful idea, but I cannot reproduce the prefactor expansion that drives the spin asymmetry; the central claim needs a check. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.21590 v1 pith:5IFHVBXV submitted 2025-07-29 hep-ph

Pei-Lun He , En-Rui Zhou , Yue-Yue Chen This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph
keywords axion-likeparticlesnonlinearComptonscatteringstrong-fieldQEDlocalconstantfieldapproximationBaier-Katkovoperatormethodspin-resolvedradiationelectronspinpolarizationintenselaserfields
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

The paper asks what happens when a relativistic electron inside an intense laser field emits an axion-like particle (ALP), the pseudoscalar cousin of the axion that couples only weakly to electrons. Using the Baier-Katkov operator method and an eikonal spinor wave function, it derives, under the local constant field approximation, a closed-form, electron spin-resolved ALP emission rate $d\Gamma/d\omega$ [Eq. (38)]. The central finding is that ALP emission is far more spin-sensitive than photon emission: spin-flip transitions dominate when the initial spin points along the electron's direction of motion or along the effective magnetic field, whereas spin-preserving transitions dominate when the spin points along the transverse acceleration. Consistent with earlier spin-unresolved plane-wave calculations after spin summation, the formula can be dropped directly into existing spin-resolved semiclassical Monte Carlo codes for strong-field QED. A sympathetic reader cares because this converts a hard phenomenological calculation into a plug-in prediction for current high-intensity laser facilities.

What carries the argument

The engine is the Baier-Katkov operator method: a semiclassical transition amplitude built from the electron's classical trajectory, with recoil effects restored through operator commutation rather than through an explicit sum over final states. The paper's specific construction is the eikonal spinor wave function [Eq. (12)], which lets the authors avoid evaluating the operator product $e^{ik\cdot\hat{x}(t')}e^{-ik\cdot\hat{x}(t)}$ that earlier derivations had to handle with the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff identity or by solving differential equations. Under the local constant field approximation ($a_0 \gg 1$), the trajectory is Taylor-expanded in the Frenet-Serret frame as uniform circular motion in an effective static magnetic field, accurate to order $O(m_e^2/\varepsilon_0^2)$, so the classical action becomes the cubic $S_c \approx -(a\tau^3 + b\tau)$; the integral over that cubic produces the modified Bessel functions $K_{1/3}$ and $K_{2/3}$ that carry the rate, exactly as in synchrotron radiation theory but with the pseudoscalar spinor structure and finite axion mass included.

What would settle it

Compare Eq. (38) with an independent evaluation of the same transition amplitude using exact Volkov wave functions (the standard dressed-electron solutions) in a finite plane-wave laser pulse at moderate intensity ($a_0 \gtrsim 1$); if the predicted spin asymmetries — spin-flip dominance for $\zeta_i = \mathbf{T}, \mathbf{B}$ and spin preservation for $\zeta_i = \mathbf{N}$ — do not emerge once the pulse's field gradients are resolved, the local-constant-field truncation is the point of failure. A cheaper test is to measure the final-electron polarization along $\mathbf{B}$ after a GeV electron traverses a laser with $\chi_e \sim 1$: the formula predicts a definite negative polarization that no photon-only background produces.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is Eq. (38): the electron spin-resolved differential axion emission rate under the local constant field approximation, expressed through the nonlinear quantum parameter $\chi_e = B_{\rm eff}\varepsilon_0/m_e^3$ and the modified Bessel functions $K_{1/3}$ and $K_{2/3}$. The derivation models the electron as a semiclassical eikonal spinor moving on a classical trajectory, replaces the instantaneous trajectory by circular motion in an effective static magnetic field $B_{\rm eff}$ (the longitudinal acceleration being a relativistic correction of relative order $m_e/\varepsilon_0$), and evaluates the resulting phase-space integral with an integration table given in Appendix A. The physics drawn from it is that transverse acceleration dominates the axion yield, and that the spin dependence differs sharply from photon emission: for an initial spin along the velocity $\mathbf{T}$ or the magnetic field $\mathbf{B}$, the spin-flip channel dominates, while for an initial spin along the acceleration $\mathbf{N}$, the spin-preserving channel dominates; an initially unpolarized electron acquires a net polarization anti-parallel to $\mathbf{B}$ that approaches $-8\sqrt{3}/15$ in the weak-field limit. After summing over spins the rate reduces to the known spin-unresolved results of Refs. [37, 38], and in the weak- and strong-field limits the total rate scales as $\Gamma \propto \chi_e^3$ and $\Gamma \propto \chi_e^{2/3}$, respectively.

Load-bearing premise

The derivation replaces the electron's true trajectory by circular motion in an effective static magnetic field and drops the longitudinal acceleration; that step is valid only while the effective electric field stays below $(\varepsilon_0/m_e)$ times the effective magnetic field, and the paper itself states that the Taylor expansion breaks down when $E_{\rm eff}/B_{\rm eff} > \varepsilon_0/m_e$, the regime of constant acceleration.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • ALP emission can be simulated event-by-event by adding Eq. (38) as a sampling rule to existing spin-resolved semiclassical Monte Carlo codes, so yields, spectra, and polarization transfer become computable for concrete laser-facility parameters.
  • Because the total rate grows as $\chi_e^3$ in the weak-field regime and $\chi_e^{2/3}$ in the strong-field regime, high-intensity facilities operating at $\chi_e \gtrsim 1$ are where ALP production becomes experimentally accessible.
  • Since spin-flip dominates for initial spin along $\mathbf{T}$ or $\mathbf{B}$ while spin preservation dominates along $\mathbf{N}$, a polarized electron beam offers a control knob for the axion emission rate and direction.
  • An unpolarized electron emerges from axion emission with a net polarization anti-parallel to the effective magnetic field, a signature that photon-only emission does not produce and that could help identify axion events.
  • A finite axion mass suppresses the rate exponentially in the weak-field regime, so the mass dependence itself becomes a probe: for $\chi_e < m_\phi/m_e$ the axion mass dominates the suppression and reshapes the spectrum.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because pair production via the nonlinear Breit-Wheeler process becomes copious at $\chi_e \gtrsim 1$, and each created pair can in turn emit axions through the same channel, the rate in Eq. (38) could be used to compute spin correlations imprinted on the final electron and positron; the paper notes this production route but does not quantify those correlations.
  • A direct stress test of the local-constant-field truncation would be to compare Eq. (38) with an exact numerical integration of the same transition amplitude over a realistic focused laser pulse, particularly in the focal wings where $E_{\rm eff}/B_{\rm eff}$ can locally exceed $\varepsilon_0/m_e$; the paper does not perform that comparison.
  • The persistence of the channel pattern ($\mathbf{T}$ and $\mathbf{B}$ flips favored, $\mathbf{N}$ preservation favored) suggests the geometry is set by the pseudoscalar vertex rather than by field details, so the same spin pattern should appear in other pseudoscalar emission settings, such as axion emission in magnetic undulators, which would be a laser-free test of the mechanism.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript derives, within the Baier–Katkov operator method and the local constant field approximation (LCFA), a spin-resolved differential rate for axion-like-particle emission from a relativistic electron in an intense laser field. The central result is Eq. (38), a closed-form expression involving modified Bessel functions, with the electron spin dependence entering through ζ_i·ζ_f and projections on the Frenet–Serret axes T, N, and B. The paper also provides weak- and strong-field asymptotic limits, numerical spectra, and a discussion of axion-mass effects, and it argues that the spin behavior of axion emission differs qualitatively from photon emission. The derivation is supported by an explicit eikonal spinor construction, appendices with integration formulas, and a check that longitudinal acceleration is relativistically suppressed.

Significance. If correct, Eq. (38) provides a practical, parameter-free input for semiclassical Monte Carlo simulations of ALP production in intense laser fields and makes falsifiable predictions about spin-dependent asymmetries. The paper has genuine strengths: the derivation is explicit, the spin-averaged limit is checked against earlier results, and the appendices supply the needed integration table and a longitudinal-acceleration suppression argument. However, the central spin-resolved formula currently rests on an intermediate prefactor, Eq. (34), that is algebraically inconsistent with the trace in Eq. (25); this must be repaired before the main claim can be accepted.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. IV B, Eq. (34)] The displayed prefactor is not the expansion of Eq. (25). Expanding B(t) from Eq. (26) at t0±τ/2 using Eq. (32) and Eq. (33) to the stated order O(m_e^2/ε0^2) gives, for ζ_i=ζ_f=B, Q_c^*(t')Q_c(t) = c0^2 α^2 with c0=ω/(2ε'_0), i.e. no ω_eff^2τ^2 term, whereas Eq. (34) contains -1/2 ω_eff^2τ^2 in this channel. For ζ_i=-ζ_f=B, the direct expansion gives c0^2[(m_e/ε0)^2 + β^2 - u^2 + 2i(m_e/ε0)u] with u=ω_effτ/2, whereas Eq. (34) gives -2u^2 - 2α^2 + 4i(m_e/ε0)u. These discrepancies are load-bearing: the relative coefficients of K_{2/3}, K_{1/3}, and ∫K in Eq. (38) are exactly the quantities that determine the spin-flip/spin-preserving ordering reported in Sec. V. The agreement of the spin-averaged rate with Refs. [37,38] does not constrain these spin-resolved coefficients, because spin summation and final-spin averaging cancel most of the disputed terms.
  2. [Sec. IV B, Eq. (38)] As written, Eq. (38) does not follow from Eq. (34) through the integration table in Appendix A. Inserting Eq. (34) into Table I produces, for the (ζ_i·N)(ζ_f·N) and (ζ_i·B)(ζ_f·B) channels, linear combinations of K_{2/3} and ∫K whose ratios differ from those in Eq. (38). An independent leading-order expansion of Eq. (25) followed by the same Table I integrals does reproduce the structure of Eq. (38) up to an overall factor, so the final formula may be correct; nevertheless, the manuscript as it stands does not provide a valid derivation chain from Eq. (34) to Eq. (38). The authors should replace Eq. (34) with the correct prefactor and verify explicitly that it integrates to Eq. (38).
minor comments (4)
  1. [Secs. IV and V] The symbol B is overloaded: it denotes both the vector function B(t) in Eqs. (25)–(26) and the unit Frenet–Serret vector in Eqs. (34) and (38). This overloading makes the prefactor manipulations very hard to follow and should be fixed with distinct notation.
  2. [After Eq. (28)] The statement 'Equation (28) also implies that n → vc(τ)' appears to have a typo; it should presumably be n → vc(t0) (or the intended time-dependence of the classical velocity should be clarified).
  3. [After Eq. (38)] The claimed consistency of the spin-averaged rate with Refs. [37,38] is asserted without a derivation; a short explicit check for the spin-summed case would substantially increase confidence in Eq. (38).
  4. [Reference [78]] Reference [78] is listed as 'arxiv Submitted'; since the paper emphasizes the Monte Carlo applicability of Eq. (38), a complete citation or arXiv identifier for the companion work would help the reader assess that claim.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: derivation is self-contained from the QED Lagrangian and benchmarked against independent spin-averaged results.

full rationale

The paper derives the spin-resolved axion emission rate from the axion–electron interaction Lagrangian (Eq. 3) using the Baier–Katkov operator method and a semiclassical eikonal spinor construction. No parameters are fitted to the target quantity; the derived rate is an explicit function of the local field strength, electron energy, and coupling constants. The spin-averaged reduction of the final rate (Eq. 38) is stated to be consistent with the independent results of Refs. [37,38], providing an external benchmark. The only self-citation (companion Ref. [78]) is used for context and not as a load-bearing step in the derivation. A reviewer concern about the internal algebraic expansion from Eq. (25) to Eq. (34) is a correctness issue, not a circularity, since there is no reduction of the claimed result to its own inputs. Overall, no circular step is identifiable.

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

The central formula rests on standard strong-field QED assumptions (Furry picture, LCFA, eikonal approximation) and on the restriction to weak longitudinal fields; no free parameters are fitted and no new entities are introduced.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The background laser field is treated as a classical external potential (Furry picture) with A^μ a solution of Maxwell's equations.
    Invoked in Sec. II after Eq. (3) to define the Furry picture; this is standard in strong-field QED but is an assumption about the laser field.
  • domain assumption The local constant field approximation applies, requiring a0 >> 1 and short formation time compared with field variation period.
    Stated in Sec. IV B and Sec. VI; the entire result Eq. (38) is derived under LCFA.
  • domain assumption The eikonal/WKB approximation neglects the σ^μν F_μν term in the second-order Dirac equation, so the electron spinor is constructed from the scalar WKB phase.
    Sec. III, after Eq. (5): the σF term is treated as linear in ℏ and neglected; this is necessary for the semiclassical spinor Eq. (12).
  • domain assumption Relativistic kinematics: electron energies before and after emission satisfy me/ε0 << 1 and me/ε'0 << 1, and the emitted axion is relativistic, mφ/ω << 1.
    Stated as assumptions in Sec. II and Sec. VI; used in the binomial expansion Eq. (23) and the truncation of O(me/ε0) terms.
  • domain assumption Longitudinal acceleration is negligible: E_eff/B_eff < ε0/me, so the trajectory can be replaced by circular motion in a constant magnetic field B_eff.
    Sec. IV B after Eq. (31) and Appendix B; if this fails the Taylor expansion in τ breaks down and Eq. (38) does not apply.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Semiclassical analysis of axion-like particle emission via nonlinear Compton-like scattering in intense laser fields." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5IFHVBXV

@misc{pith2026250721590,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Semiclassical analysis of axion-like particle emission via nonlinear Compton-like scattering in intense laser fields},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5IFHVBXV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.21590}
}
read the original abstract

We investigate the production of axion-like particles through nonlinear Compton-like scattering in intense laser fields using the Baier-Katkov operator method. By explicitly constructing the eikonal spinor wave function, we utilize the semiclassical nature of relativistic electrons, which simplifies the theoretical derivation and circumvents the need to evaluate certain operator products. The electron spin-resolved axion emission rate is obtained under the local constant field approximation, with explicit calculations demonstrating that transverse acceleration dominates the radiation yields. The electron spin dependence of the axion emission rate is found to differ significantly from that of photon emission by analytically examining the asymptotic behavior of the radiation in both the weak- and strong-field limits and by numerically exploring the intermediate regime. The derived spin-resolved axion emission rate can be directly incorporated into existing semiclassical Monte Carlo algorithms developed for strong-field photon processes, enabling efficient modeling of axion-like particle generation. Our results provide promising avenues for the experimental detection and control of axion-like particles with high-intensity laser facilities.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.21590 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Illustration of axion emission in intense laser fields via [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The logarithm of the spin-resolved differential axion radiation rate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. The logarithm of the spin-resolved differential axion radiation rate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The effect of finite axion mass on the spin-resolved total radiation rate Γ (solid black line) and the average emitted [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Dependence of axion production on the nonlinear quantum parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. The net electron polarization [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

86 extracted references · 74 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Polyakov, Compact gauge fields and the infrared catastrophe, Physics Letters B 59, 82 (1975)

    A. Polyakov, Compact gauge fields and the infrared catastrophe, Physics Letters B 59, 82 (1975)

    1975

  2. [2]

    Jackiw and C

    R. Jackiw and C. Rebbi, Vacuum periodicity in a Yang- Mills quantum theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 37, 172 (1976)

    1976

  3. [3]

    Callan, R

    C. Callan, R. Dashen, and D. Gross, The structure of the gauge theory vacuum, Physics Letters B 63, 334 (1976)

    1976

  4. [4]

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, Constraints imposed by CP conservation in the presence of pseudoparticles, Phys. Rev. D 16, 1791 (1977)

    1977

  5. [5]

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, CP conservation in the presence of pseudoparticles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 1440 (1977)

    1977

  6. [6]

    Wilczek, Problem of strong P and T invariance in the presence of instantons, Phys

    F. Wilczek, Problem of strong P and T invariance in the presence of instantons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 279 (1978)

    1978

  7. [7]

    Weinberg, A new light boson?, Phys

    S. Weinberg, A new light boson?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 223 (1978)

    1978

  8. [8]

    J. E. Kim, Light pseudoscalars, particle physics and cos- mology, Physics Reports 150, 1 (1987)

    work page 1987

Show all 86 references
  1. [9]

    J. E. Kim, Weak-interaction singlet and strong CP in- variance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 43, 103 (1979)

    1979

  2. [10]

    In contrast, the axion mass δm has a suppressive ef- fect, which is most pronounced at low field strengths [see Eq. (40)]. Panels (b)–(d) examine the spin asymmetry parameter Asy = Γ↑→↑ − Γ↑→↓ Γ↑→↑ + Γ↑→↓ , (42) which quantifies the degree of final spin polarization along the ...

  3. [11]

    Shifman, A

    M. Shifman, A. Vainshtein, and V. Zakharov, Can con- finement ensure natural CP invariance of strong interac- tions?, Nuclear Physics B 166, 493 (1980)

    1980

  4. [12]

    A. R. Zhitnitsky, On Possible Suppression of the Axion Hadron Interactions. (In Russian), Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 31, 260 (1980)

    1980

  5. [13]

    M. Dine, W. Fischler, and M. Srednicki, A simple solution to the strong CP problem with a harmless axion, Physics Letters B 104, 199 (1981)

    1981

  6. [14]

    Peccei, T

    R. Peccei, T. T. Wu, and T. Yanagida, A viable axion model, Physics Letters B 172, 435 (1986)

    1986

  7. [15]

    D. J. Marsh, Axion cosmology, Physics Reports 643, 1 (2016)

    2016

  8. [16]

    Witten, Some properties of O(32) superstrings, Physics Letters B 149, 351 (1984)

    E. Witten, Some properties of O(32) superstrings, Physics Letters B 149, 351 (1984)

    1984

  9. [17]

    Arvanitaki, S

    A. Arvanitaki, S. Dimopoulos, S. Dubovsky, N. Kaloper, and J. March-Russell, String axiverse, Phys. Rev. D 81, 123530 (2010)

    2010

  10. [18]

    L. Wu, M. Salehi, N. Koirala, J. Moon, S. Oh, and N. Ar- mitage, Quantized Faraday and Kerr rotation and axion electrodynamics of a 3D topological insulator, Science 354, 1124 (2016)

    2016

  11. [19]

    K. N. Okada, Y. Takahashi, M. Mogi, R. Yoshimi, A. Tsukazaki, K. S. Takahashi, N. Ogawa, M. Kawasaki, and Y. Tokura, Terahertz spectroscopy on Faraday and Kerr rotations in a quantum anomalous Hall state, Na- ture communications 7, 12245 (2016)

    2016

  12. [20]

    Zhang, M

    D. Zhang, M. Shi, T. Zhu, D. Xing, H. Zhang, and J. Wang, Topological axion states in the magnetic insula- tor MnBi2Te4 with the quantized magnetoelectric effect, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 206401 (2019)

    2019

  13. [21]

    C. Liu, Y. Wang, H. Li, Y. Wu, Y. Li, J. Li, K. He, Y. Xu, J. Zhang, and Y. Wang, Robust axion insulator and chern insulator phases in a two-dimensional antiferromagnetic topological insulator, Nature materials 19, 522 (2020)

    2020

  14. [22]

    Wilczek, Two applications of axion electrodynamics, Phys

    F. Wilczek, Two applications of axion electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 1799 (1987)

    1987

  15. [23]

    Gooth, B

    J. Gooth, B. Bradlyn, S. Honnali, C. Schindler, N. Ku- mar, J. Noky, Y. Qi, C. Shekhar, Y. Sun, Z. Wang, et al., Axionic charge-density wave in the Weyl semimetal (TaSe4)2I, Nature 575, 315 (2019)

    2019

  16. [24]

    I. G. Irastorza and J. Redondo, New experimental ap- proaches in the search for axion-like particles, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 102, 89 (2018)

    2018

  17. [25]

    Di Luzio, M

    L. Di Luzio, M. Giannotti, E. Nardi, and L. Visinelli, The landscape of QCD axion models, Physics Reports 870, 1 (2020)

    2020

  18. [26]

    Sikivie, Invisible axion search methods, Rev

    P. Sikivie, Invisible axion search methods, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 015004 (2021)

    2021

  19. [27]

    Carenza, M

    P. Carenza, M. Giannotti, J. Isern, A. Mirizzi, and O. Straniero, Axion astrophysics, Physics Reports 1117, 1 (2025)

    2025

  20. [28]

    Pugnat, R

    P. Pugnat, R. Ballou, M. Schott, T. Husek, M. Sulc, G. Deferne, L. Duvillaret, M. Finger, M. Finger, L. Flekova, et al., Search for weakly interacting sub-ev particles with the OSQAR laser-based experiment: re- sults and perspectives, The European Physical Journal C 74, 1 (2014)

    2014

  21. [29]

    Ballou, G

    R. Ballou, G. Deferne, M. Finger Jr, M. Finger, L. Flekova, J. Hosek, S. Kunc, K. Macuchova, K. Meiss- ner, P. Pugnat, et al., New exclusion limits on scalar and pseudoscalar axionlike particles from light shining through a wall, Phys. Rev. D 92, 092002 (2015)

    2015

  22. [30]

    Della Valle, A

    F. Della Valle, A. Ejlli, U. Gastaldi, G. Messineo, 15 E. Milotti, R. Pengo, G. Ruoso, and G. Zavattini, The pvlas experiment: measuring vacuum magnetic birefrin- gence and dichroism with a birefringent Fabry–Perot cav- ity, The European Physical Journal C 76, 1 (2016)

    2016

  23. [31]

    Konaka, K

    A. Konaka, K. Imai, H. Kobayashi, A. Masaike, K. Miyake, T. Nakamura, N. Nagamine, N. Sasao, A. Enomoto, Y. Fukushima, et al., Search for neutral particles in electron-beam-dump experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 659 (1986)

    1986

  24. [32]

    Davier and H

    M. Davier and H. N. Ngoc, An unambiguous search for a light higgs boson, Physics Letters B 229, 150 (1989)

    1989

  25. [33]

    Bross, M

    A. Bross, M. Crisler, S. Pordes, J. Volk, S. Errede, and J. Wrbanek, Search for short-lived particles produced in an electron beam dump, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 2942 (1991)

    1991

  26. [34]

    Abrahamyan, Z

    S. Abrahamyan, Z. Ahmed, K. Allada, D. Anez, T. Averett, A. Barbieri, K. Bartlett, J. Beacham, J. Bono, J. Boyce, et al., Search for a new gauge boson in electron-nucleus fixed-target scattering by the APEX experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 191804 (2011)

    2011

  27. [35]

    Mendon¸ ca, Axion excitation by intense laser fields, Eu- rophysics Letters 79, 21001 (2007)

    J. Mendon¸ ca, Axion excitation by intense laser fields, Eu- rophysics Letters 79, 21001 (2007)

    2007

  28. [36]

    Gies, Strong laser fields as a probe for fundamen- tal physics, The European Physical Journal D 55, 311 (2009)

    H. Gies, Strong laser fields as a probe for fundamen- tal physics, The European Physical Journal D 55, 311 (2009)

    2009

  29. [37]

    D¨ obrich and H

    B. D¨ obrich and H. Gies, Axion-like-particle search with high-intensity lasers, Journal of High Energy Physics 2010, 1 (2010)

    2010

  30. [38]

    B. M. Dillon and B. King, ALP production through non- linear Compton scattering in intense fields, The Euro- pean Physical Journal C 78, 1 (2018)

    2018

  31. [39]

    B. King, B. Dillon, K. Beyer, and G. Gregori, Axion-like- particle decay in strong electromagnetic backgrounds, Journal of High Energy Physics 2019, 1 (2019)

    2019

  32. [40]

    Ma and T

    K. Ma and T. Li, Laser induced compton scattering to dark photon or axionlike particle, Phys. Rev. D 111, 055001 (2025)

    2025

  33. [41]

    D. M. Wolkow, ¨Uber eine klasse von l¨ osungen der dirac- schen gleichung, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik94, 250 (1935)

    1935

  34. [42]

    King, Electron-seeded ALP production and ALP de- cay in an oscillating electromagnetic field, Phys

    B. King, Electron-seeded ALP production and ALP de- cay in an oscillating electromagnetic field, Phys. Lett. B 782, 737 (2018), arXiv:1802.07507 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  35. [43]

    B. M. Dillon and B. King, Light scalars: Coherent non- linear thomson scattering and detection, Phys. Rev. D 99, 035048 (2019)

    2019

  36. [44]

    Z. Bai, T. Blackburn, O. Borysov, O. Davidi, A. Hartin, B. Heinemann, T. Ma, G. Perez, A. Santra, Y. Soreq, and N. T. Hod, New physics searches with an optical dump at LUXE, Phys. Rev. D 106, 115034 (2022)

    2022

  37. [45]

    Huang, B

    S. Huang, B. Shen, Z. Bu, X. Zhang, L. Ji, and S. Zhai, Axion-like particle generation in laser-plasma interaction, Physica Scripta 97, 105303 (2022)

    2022

  38. [46]

    X. An, M. Chen, J. Liu, Z. Sheng, and J. Zhang, Mod- eling of axion and electromagnetic fields interaction in particle-in-cell simulations, Matter and Radiation at Ex- tremes 9 (2024)

    2024

  39. [47]

    X. An, M. Chen, J. Liu, Z. Bai, L. Ji, Z. Sheng, and J. Zhang, In situ axion generation and detection in laser-driven wakefields, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.12500 (2025)

    2025

  40. [48]

    J. W. Yoon, Y. G. Kim, I. W. Choi, J. H. Sung, H. W. Lee, S. K. Lee, and C. H. Nam, Realization of laser in- tensity over 1023 W/cm2, Optica 8, 630 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    V. N. Baier and V. M. Katkov, Concept of formation length in radiation theory, Physics Reports 409, 261 (2005)

    2005

  42. [50]

    Ritus, Quantum effects of the interaction of elemen- tary particles with an intense electromagnetic field, J

    V. Ritus, Quantum effects of the interaction of elemen- tary particles with an intense electromagnetic field, J. Sov. Laser Res. 6 (1985)

    1985

  43. [51]

    Di Piazza, K

    A. Di Piazza, K. Hatsagortsyan, and C. H. Keitel, Quan- tum radiation reaction effects in multiphoton Compton scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 220403 (2010)

    2010

  44. [52]

    Elkina, A

    N. Elkina, A. Fedotov, I. Y. Kostyukov, M. Legkov, N. Narozhny, E. Nerush, and H. Ruhl, QED cascades induced by circularly polarized laser fields, Phys. Rev. ST Accel. Beams 14, 054401 (2011)

    2011

  45. [53]

    C. P. Ridgers, J. G. Kirk, R. Duclous, T. G. Blackburn, C. S. Brady, K. Bennett, T. D. Arber, and A. R. Bell, Modelling gamma-ray photon emission and pair produc- tion in high-intensity laser–matter interactions, Journal of Computational Physics 260, 273 (2014)

    2014

  46. [54]

    Green and C

    D. Green and C. Harvey, Simla: Simulating particle dy- namics in intense laser and other electromagnetic fields via classical and quantum electrodynamics, Computer Physics Communications 192, 313 (2015)

    2015

  47. [55]

    Gonoskov, S

    A. Gonoskov, S. Bastrakov, E. Efimenko, A. Ilderton, M. Marklund, I. Meyerov, A. Muraviev, A. Sergeev, I. Surmin, and E. Wallin, Extended particle-in-cell schemes for physics in ultrastrong laser fields: Review and developments, Phys. Rev. E 92, 023305 (2015)

    2015

  48. [56]

    Zhuang, Y.-Y

    K.-H. Zhuang, Y.-Y. Chen, Y.-F. Li, K. Z. Hatsagort- syan, and C. H. Keitel, Laser-driven lepton polarization in the quantum radiation-dominated reflection regime, Phys. Rev. D 108, 033001 (2023)

    2023

  49. [57]

    Schwinger, The quantum correction in the radiation by energetic accelerated electrons, Proceedings of the Na- tional Academy of Sciences 40, 132 (1954)

    J. Schwinger, The quantum correction in the radiation by energetic accelerated electrons, Proceedings of the Na- tional Academy of Sciences 40, 132 (1954)

    1954

  50. [58]

    Baier and V

    V. Baier and V. Katkov, Processes involved in the motion of high energy particles in a magnetic field, Sov. Phys. JETP 26, 854 (1968)

    1968

  51. [59]

    Baier and V

    V. Baier and V. Katkov, Quasiclassical theory of bremsstrahlung by relativistic particles, Sov. Phys. JETP 26, 854 (1968)

    1968

  52. [60]

    V. B. Berestetskii, L. P. Pitaevskii, and E. M. Lifshitz, Quantum Electrodynamics: Volume 4, Vol. 4 (Elsevier, 2012)

    2012

  53. [61]

    V. N. Baier, V. M. Katkov, and V. M. Strakhovenko, Electromagnetic processes at high energies in oriented single crystals, World Scientific (1998)

    1998

  54. [62]

    Baier and V

    V. Baier and V. Katkov, Recent develop- ment of quasiclassical operator method, in Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Vol. 198 (IOP Publishing, 2009) p. 012003

    2009

  55. [63]

    O. V. Bogdanov, P. Kazinski, and G. Y. Lazarenko, Semi- classical probability of radiation of twisted photons in the ultrarelativistic limit, Phys. Rev. D 99, 116016 (2019)

    2019

  56. [64]

    Y.-Y. Chen, K. Z. Hatsagortsyan, C. H. Keitel, and R. Shaisultanov, Electron spin-and photon polarization- resolved probabilities of strong-field QED processes, Phys. Rev. D 105, 116013 (2022)

    2022

  57. [65]

    Li, Y.-Y

    Y.-F. Li, Y.-Y. Chen, K. Z. Hatsagortsyan, A. Di Piazza, M. Tamburini, and C. Keitel, Strong signature of one- loop self-energy in polarization resolved nonlinear comp- ton scattering, Phys. Rev. D 107, 116020 (2023)

    2023

  58. [66]

    Bargmann, L

    V. Bargmann, L. Michel, and V. Telegdi, Precession of the polarization of particles moving in a homogeneous electromagnetic field, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2, 435 (1959). 16

    1959

  59. [67]

    Y.-F. Li, R. Shaisultanov, Y.-Y. Chen, F. Wan, K. Z. Hatsagortsyan, C. H. Keitel, and J.-X. Li, Polarized ul- trashort brilliant multi-gev γ rays via single-shot laser- electron interaction, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 014801 (2020)

    2020

  60. [68]

    Dai, B.-F

    Y.-N. Dai, B.-F. Shen, J.-X. Li, R. Shaisultanov, K. Z. Hatsagortsyan, C. H. Keitel, and Y.-Y. Chen, Photon po- larization effects in polarized electron–positron pair pro- duction in a strong laser field, Matter and Radiation at Extremes 7 (2022)

    2022

  61. [69]

    Y.-N. Dai, K. Z. Hatsagortsyan, C. H. Keitel, and Y.-Y. Chen, Fermionic signal of vacuum polarization in strong laser fields, Phys. Rev. D 110, 012008 (2024)

    2024

  62. [70]

    Y.-F. Li, R. Shaisultanov, K. Z. Hatsagortsyan, F. Wan, C. H. Keitel, and J.-X. Li, Ultrarelativistic electron-beam polarization in single-shot interaction with an ultrain- tense laser pulse, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 154801 (2019)

    2019

  63. [71]

    Li, Y.-Y

    Y.-F. Li, Y.-Y. Chen, K. Z. Hatsagortsyan, and C. H. Keitel, Helicity transfer in strong laser fields via the elec- tron anomalous magnetic moment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 174801 (2022)

    2022

  64. [72]

    Chen, P.-L

    Y.-Y. Chen, P.-L. He, R. Shaisultanov, K. Z. Hatsagort- syan, and C. H. Keitel, Polarized positron beams via in- tense two-color laser pulses, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 174801 (2019)

    2019

  65. [73]

    Li, Y.-Y

    Y.-F. Li, Y.-Y. Chen, W.-M. Wang, and H.-S. Hu, Pro- duction of highly polarized positron beams via helicity transfer from polarized electrons in a strong laser field, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 044802 (2020)

    2020

  66. [74]

    Z. Gong, K. Z. Hatsagortsyan, and C. H. Keitel, Re- trieving transient magnetic fields of ultrarelativistic laser plasma via ejected electron polarization, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 165002 (2021)

    2021

  67. [75]

    Song, W.-M

    H.-H. Song, W.-M. Wang, and Y.-T. Li, Dense polarized positrons from laser-irradiated foil targets in the QED regime, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 035001 (2022)

    2022

  68. [76]

    Z. Gong, K. Z. Hatsagortsyan, and C. H. Keitel, Electron polarization in ultrarelativistic plasma current filamenta- tion instabilities, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 015101 (2023)

    2023

  69. [77]

    Z. Gong, X. Shen, K. Z. Hatsagortsyan, and C. H. Kei- tel, Electron slingshot acceleration in relativistic pretur- bulent shocks explored via emitted photon polarization, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 225101 (2023)

    2023

  70. [78]

    K. Xue, T. Sun, K.-J. Wei, Z.-P. Li, Q. Zhao, F. Wan, C. Lv, Y.-T. Zhao, Z.-F. Xu, and J.-X. Li, Generation of high-density high-polarization positrons via single-shot strong laser-foil interaction, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 175101 (2023)

    2023

  71. [79]

    J.-D. Chen, H. Liu, B. Shen, P.-L. He, and Y.-Y. Chen, Spin-dependent axion generation with controllable emis- sion angles in strong laser fields, arxiv Submitted

  72. [80]

    W. H. Furry, On bound states and scattering in positron theory, Phys. Rev. 81, 115 (1951)

    1951

  73. [81]

    Di Piazza, C

    A. Di Piazza, C. M¨ uller, K. Hatsagortsyan, and C. H. Keitel, Extremely high-intensity laser interactions with fundamental quantum systems, Rev. Mod. Phys 84, 1177 (2012)

    2012

  74. [82]

    Fedotov, A

    A. Fedotov, A. Ilderton, F. Karbstein, B. King, D. Seipt, H. Taya, and G. Torgrimsson, Advances in qed with in- tense background fields, Physics Reports 1010, 1 (2023)

    2023

  75. [83]

    Esarey, C

    E. Esarey, C. B. Schroeder, and W. P. Leemans, Physics of laser-driven plasma-based electron accelerators, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 1229 (2009)

    2009

  76. [84]

    L. D. Landau, The classical theory of fields, Vol. 2 (Else- vier, 2013)

    2013

  77. [85]

    Schwinger, L

    J. Schwinger, L. L. DeRaad Jr, K. Milton, and W.-Y. Tsai, Classical electrodynamics (CRC Press, 2019)

    2019

  78. [86]

    W. G. Unruh, Notes on black-hole evaporation, Phys. Rev. D 14, 870 (1976)

    1976

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.