Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

By expanding the dynamics in the Heisenberg picture, this paper derives closed-form quantum corrections to the emitters in high-order harmonic generation and shows these corrections can substantially increase the squeezing of the emitted li

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 16:14 UTC pith:UWOIXT5T

load-bearing objection Promising Heisenberg-picture treatment of quantum-optical HHG whose central control claim is not supported in the large-N regime; the squeezing enhancement may be an artifact of the truncation. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2512.14174 v1 pith:UWOIXT5T submitted 2025-12-16 quant-ph

High-Order Harmonic Generation with Beyond-Semiclassical Emitter Dynamics: A Strong-Field Quantum Optical Heisenberg Picture Approach

Christian Saugbjerg Lange , Ella Elisabeth Lassen , Rasmus Vesterager Gothelf , Lars Bojer Madsen This is my paper
classification quant-ph
keywords high-order harmonic generationquantum opticsHeisenberg picturesqueezed lightphoton statisticsstrong-field physicsperturbative expansionFermi-Hubbard model
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper tries to establish a controlled, closed-form quantum-optical description of high-order harmonic generation (HHG) that goes beyond the usual semiclassical treatment of the emitting medium. The central claim is that the emitters' dynamics acquire small but important corrections from their coupling to the quantized electromagnetic field, and that these beyond-semiclassical corrections, captured by a perturbative Heisenberg-picture expansion, significantly change the predicted nonclassical properties of the emitted light. In particular, the paper claims the degree of squeezing grows with the number of independent emitters, while the photon statistics become Poissonian (classical) in the many-emitter limit—so squeezed light and classical photon counting can coexist. A sympathetic reader would care because this gives an experimentally accessible route to squeezing in the UV/XUV range and a direct link between a photonic observable and the underlying electron dynamics.

Core claim

The paper's key result is a set of equations—(25)–(27) of the paper—that express the exact emitter momentum Q'(t) in a displaced, rotating frame as the semiclassically driven response Q_sc(t) plus a quantum correction Q_q(t) built from commutators of the interaction with the driven emitter. Expanding the time-evolution operator to second order in the effective coupling N g0 |p~(ω)| yields closed expressions for the harmonic spectrum, the quadrature variance (squeezing), and the second-order correlation function g(2)(0). For the spectrum, the leading-order prediction coincides with the semiclassical result, so quantum corrections to the emitter do not alter the harmonic spectrum; for squeezin

What carries the argument

The central object is the strong-field quantum-optical perturbative Heisenberg dynamics (PHD) expansion: after displacing the intense coherent driver into the Hamiltonian and moving to the rotating frames of both the semiclassical Hamiltonian and the free field, the time-evolution operator U'(t) is expanded to second order in the small effective coupling N g0 |p~(ω)|. This yields Eq. (25): Q'(t) = Q_sc(t) + Q_q(t), with the quantum correction Q_q(t) given by nested commutators of the interaction V(t) = A(t)·Q_sc(t) with the semiclassically driven dipole (Eq. (27)). The expansion turns the intractable joint light-matter dynamics into closed-form integrals over semiclassical two-time correlati

Load-bearing premise

The whole calculation rests on the assumption that the effective light-matter coupling N g0 |p~(ω)| is much smaller than one; for the largest emitter numbers considered here (10^7) that product can approach one, and the paper itself notes the leading correction term cannot be evaluated because the required sum over all light modes is uncontrolled.

What would settle it

Compute the O(g0^4 N^3) correction to the harmonic spectrum of Appendix D using a convergent regularization of the mode sum; if for N=10^6–10^7 it is comparable to the coherent spectrum, the expansion is not controlled. Alternatively, measure quadrature squeezing and g(2)(0) from a gas jet as the emitter density is varied: the theory predicts squeezing increasing linearly with N and g(2) approaching 1, so observing g(2) clearly below 1 at large N, or squeezing not increasing with density, would contradict the central claim.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • To leading order, the HHG spectrum is unchanged by the beyond-semiclassical emitter dynamics, so standard semiclassical spectrum calculations remain valid in the regimes studied.
  • The degree of squeezing scales linearly with the number of independent emitters and is significantly enhanced by the quantum correction term, implying that larger phase-matched ensembles should produce more squeezed harmonic light.
  • In the many-emitter limit, the second-order correlation function g(2)(0) tends to 1, so the emitted light can be simultaneously squeezed and Poissonian in photon statistics.
  • The framework justifies the mode-decoupling product ansatz used in Schrödinger-picture treatments, since to leading order different harmonic modes do not couple.
  • The approach applies to both atomic gases and strongly correlated solids (Fermi-Hubbard chains), indicating that a strong electronic resonance boosts squeezing in both classes of emitters.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • One consequence the authors leave implicit: because squeezing grows with N while g(2) approaches 1, experiments that detect nonclassicality via photon statistics alone could miss the squeezing; quadrature measurements are the discriminating probe.
  • A testable extension would be to drive the same atomic model with a bright squeezed vacuum input; the PHD expansion could be adapted to check whether the predicted N-scaling of the nonclassical output survives when the input already carries squeezing.
  • The uncontrolled O(g0^4 N^3) mode sum identified in Appendix D suggests the formalism's accuracy claim is only as strong as a regularization of that sum; a future calculation supplying a convergent evaluation would either confirm or bound the perturbative regime.
  • The resonance-enhanced squeezing seen at the ninth harmonic in atoms and at the Mott exciton in the Hubbard model hints that resonantly tuned driving fields could amplify squeezing without raising N—an optimization the authors mention but do not pursue quantitatively.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper develops a Heisenberg-picture perturbative framework, termed PHD, for quantum-optical high-order harmonic generation. After displacing the coherent driving field and transforming to the semiclassical and free-field frames, the authors expand the interaction-picture evolution operator to second order in the effective coupling N g0 |p~(ω)|, obtaining closed-form expressions for the harmonic spectrum, quadrature squeezing, and g^(2)(0). The central new ingredient is the quantum correction to the semiclassical emitter dynamics, Eq. (25)-(27), which is claimed to significantly enhance the predicted squeezing. The framework is applied to an atomic ensemble and to an extended Fermi-Hubbard model, yielding N-scaling results: the coherent spectrum grows as N^2, the squeezing (variance) grows linearly in N, and g^(2)(0) tends to 1 for large N. The authors argue that the PHD is accurately controlled and preferable to Schrödinger-picture approaches, which they benchmark against.

Significance. If the central control claim held, the paper would provide a useful and computationally light tool for strong-field quantum optics, with clear N-scaling relations and an explicit link between photon statistics and emitter correlations. The derivation is largely self-contained and the appendices provide substantial detail, including exact factorizations of many-emitter expectation values and a comparison with the Schrödinger-picture product ansatz. The authors also explicitly identify a limitation in App. D, which is commendable. However, as detailed in the major comments, the load-bearing assertion that the expansion is accurately controlled in the experimentally relevant large-N regime is not established, and the paper's own App. D contains an admission that the leading correction cannot be evaluated. The qualitative predictions — increasing squeezing with N and Poissonian statistics for large N — may well be correct, but the quantitative 'controlled and accurate' claim requires either a rigorous remainder bound or a restriction to smaller N.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II B 1, Eq. (23) and Sec. III B, Fig. 3] The perturbative control condition is Eq. (23), N g0 |p~(omega)| << 1. With g0 = 4e-8 a.u. and |p~(omega)| < 5 a.u., the product is about 2 at N = 1e7 and about 0.2 at N = 1e6. Yet the headline results in Fig. 3 are shown for N = 1e5, 1e6, and 1e7, including the largest value where the expansion parameter is not small. The claim that higher-order terms are negligible is therefore not supported in the very regime used to demonstrate the large-N scaling and the g^(2) -> 1 limit. The authors should either restrict the validity claim to N satisfying Eq. (23) with a numerical margin, or provide a quantitative estimate of the remainder beyond second order.
  2. [App. D, after Eq. (D7)] The first non-vanishing correction to the harmonic spectrum is shown to be O(g0^4 N^3), and the authors write that the mode sum needed to evaluate it has a 'resolution and termination point [that] are not well defined nor understood, making the evaluation uncontrolled.' This is a direct admission that the leading correction to the central observable cannot be quantified. The main text (Sec. II B 2) nevertheless states that the truncation is justified by Eq. (23). The selection-rule argument that follows constrains only the spectral correction; it provides no bound on the O(g0^4 N^3) corrections to the quadrature variance in Eq. (32) or to g^(2) in Eq. (33), which are the quantities behind the claimed beyond-semiclassical enhancement of squeezing. The 'accurately controlled' characterization is therefore not established for the non-spectral observables.
  3. [Sec. II B 2] The argument that the experimental observation of only odd harmonics 'proves that the coherent part of the spectrum is the dominating term, which puts both an upper and lower boundary on N' is an empirical consistency check, not a mathematical control of the expansion. It assumes that the O(g0^4 N^3) correction, if non-negligible, would necessarily produce detectable even-order contributions and that no other physical mechanism suppresses them. This does not replace a bound on the remainder, especially because the same argument cannot be applied to the quadrature variance or g^(2). The validity of the PHD in the large-N regime should be justified from the expansion itself, not from the experimental outcome it is meant to predict.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II B 1, Eq. (23)] The quantity p~(omega) is used to state the expansion condition but is never defined precisely. Please specify whether it is the Fourier transform of the single-emitter dipole expectation value, its maximum over the pulse, or another quantity, and provide its value for the two model systems.
  2. [App. A and App. B] There are several typographical slips: 'conferring with' should be 'cf.'; 'indeces' should be 'indices'; 'consitute' should be 'constitute'. These do not affect the results.
  3. [Sec. III C] The estimate N ~ 6.3e6 for the Hubbard chains relies on several simplifying assumptions listed in the text. Since the paper identifies N as the key parameter controlling both the validity condition and the observable scalings, it would be helpful to give an uncertainty range for this estimate and to state explicitly whether the quoted N satisfies Eq. (23) for the Hubbard parameters.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Central derivation is self-contained algebra; no prediction reduces by construction to a fit. Minor self-reliance via comparing to the authors' own Schrödinger-picture work, but that comparison is not load-bearing for the PHD equations.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, Eqs. (25)-(27), is obtained by a direct perturbative expansion of the transformed time-evolution operator U'(t) in Eq. (20) with interaction V(t) = A(t)·Q_sc(t), followed by insertion into the exact expression Eq. (17) for Q'(t). No parameter is fitted to the quantities later called predictions: the N-scaling of the spectrum (N^2 coherent, N incoherent), the linear N-scaling of the quadrature variance, and the g^(2)(0) -> 1 limit follow from the combinatorial factorization of expectation values over independent emitters in App. B, not from fitted constants. The comparison to the Schrödinger-picture results is made largely with the authors' own prior works (Refs. [18,27-29]), but these comparisons are presented as cross-checks rather than as the source of the PHD equations; the perturbative expressions stand on the algebra in Secs. II.B and Apps. A-D. The validity argument from the experimental observation of odd-only harmonics is an external empirical constraint, not a circular reduction. The admitted lack of control in App. D ('The proper way to numerically evaluate Eq. (D6) remains an issue for future research... whose resolution and termination point are not well defined nor understood, making the evaluation uncontrolled') is a genuine correctness/control risk and weakens the 'accurately controlled' claim, but it is not circularity: the leading-order derivation does not presuppose the conclusion it draws about beyond-semiclassical squeezing enhancement. Overall, no step reduces by construction to its own input, so the circularity score is low despite the self-reliance in benchmarking.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The derivation is largely self-contained from a standard light-matter Hamiltonian. The main input from outside is the semiclassical dipole response and its two-time correlations, computed with model parameters from prior literature. No invented entities are introduced. The one fragile input is the assertion that the perturbative expansion is controlled in the experimentally relevant regime, which the paper itself leaves unresolved.

free parameters (3)
  • soft-core parameter epsilon = 0.816 a.u.
    Chosen to match Ne ionization potential (Ip=0.7926 a.u.) in the 1D atomic model; enters all atomic ensemble results.
  • Fermi-Hubbard parameters (t0, U/t0, V/t0, a) = t0=0.0191 a.u., U=12t0, V=4t0, a=7.5589 a.u.
    Taken from prior literature to model a Mott-insulator material; not fitted to target observables.
  • Quantization volume V = (10 lambda_L)^3
    Sets g0=4e-8 a.u. (atoms) or 3e-9 a.u. (Hubbard); authors state results are qualitatively insensitive as long as Eq. (23) holds.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Dipole approximation and neglect of the A^2 term in the Hamiltonian (Eq. (1) to Eq. (4)).
    Invoked after Eq. (4) with citation to refs; standard in strong-field treatments but not derived here.
  • domain assumption Emitters are independent and identical, with factorization of moments (Eq. (6)).
    Used to derive N-scaling and closed forms; ignores inter-emitter correlations, propagation, and phase-matching variations.
  • ad hoc to paper Perturbative expansion in N g0 |p~(omega)| is small and higher-order terms are negligible.
    Central validity premise asserted in Sec. II B after Eq. (23); the leading correction is not evaluated, and App D admits the mode sum is uncontrolled.
  • domain assumption Two-time correlations are computed via resolution of identity in field-free eigenstates, truncated at 250 states for the atom.
    Eq. (35) and Sec. III B; requires propagating all excited states, limiting system sizes and making convergence a numerical assumption.
  • standard math Coherent driving field can be displaced into a classical field, leaving all modes in vacuum.
    Standard quantum-optics displacement-frame transformation (Cohen-Tannoudji); used to define U' and V(t).

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 37028 in / 14997 out tokens · 119571 ms · 2026-08-03T16:14:00.393510+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Quantum-optical descriptions of strong-field processes have attracted significant attention in recent years. Typically, the theoretical modeling has been conducted in the Schr\"odinger picture, where results are only obtainable under certain approximations, while, in contrast, the Heisenberg picture has remained relatively unexplored. In this work, we develop an accurately controlled perturbative expansion of the time-evolution operator in the Heisenberg picture and derive beyond-semiclassical corrections to the emitter dynamics due to the coupling to the quantized electromagnetic field, capturing effects of the quantum fluctuations present in the latter. We focus on high-order harmonic generation (HHG), where the approach is accurate in parameter regimes of current interest and it gives closed-form expressions for key observables. This formulation not only simplifies numerical calculations compared to the Schr\"odinger-picture approach but also provides a clear correspondence between nonclassical features of the emitted light and the underlying induced dynamics of the generating medium including quantum fluctuations. Moreover, the Heisenberg framework naturally yields scaling relations with the number of independent emitters, enabling us to assess whether nonclassical behavior should persist under typical experimental conditions involving large emitter ensembles. Interestingly, we find that the degree of squeezing increases with the number of emitters, whereas the photon statistics approaches a classical Poissonian distribution in the many-emitter limit. We also find that the beyond-semiclassical emitter dynamics significantly enhances the degree of squeezing of the emitted light. Our work advances the theoretical understanding of quantum-optical HHG and introduces an accessible and well-controlled framework to describe realistic experiments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.14174 by Christian Saugbjerg Lange, Ella Elisabeth Lassen, Lars Bojer Madsen, Rasmus Vesterager Gothelf.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Quantum corrections to semiclassical emitter dynam [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. HHG spectra calculated using Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Response from an atomic ensemble of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Response from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Degree of squeezing from beyond-semiclassical emit [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Limitations of an approximative phase-space description in strong-field quantum optics

    quant-ph 2026-02 conditional novelty 5.0

    Under no dipole correlations, the APP approximation of a nonclassical driving field is an incoherent mixture of coherent states, so it cannot produce sub-Poissonian statistics or squeezing in HHG light.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Ruimy, A

    R. Ruimy, A. Karnieli, and I. Kaminer, Free-electron quantum optics, Nature Physics21, 193 (2025)

    2025

  2. [2]

    (27) into Eq

    Backaction and photonic observables Returning to the photonic operator, we insert Eq. (27) into Eq. (16) and obtain ˆa′ k,σ(t) = ˆa′ k,σ(0)e−iωkt −i g0 √ωk Z t 0 dt′ ˆeσ · ˆQsc(t′) + ˆQq(t′) e−iωk(t−t′). (28) Equation (28) is the solution for the photonic operator using the PHD description and is the central equation de- scribing the photon dynamics. This...

  3. [3]

    The off-diagonal elements therefore, remain finite even when the emitter stays entirely in its ground state; they merely encode its intrinsic time correlations, which, in the absence of a driving field, vanish only after time integration. Thus, one cannot discard the transition- dipole elements on the basis of small excited-state popu- lation, or, equival...

  4. [4]

    This results in the terms q D(0) k,σ and q ˜D(2) k,σ of Eqs

    term that does not vanish when calculating the expectation value. This results in the terms q D(0) k,σ and q ˜D(2) k,σ of Eqs. (A15a) and (A15e) above. As discussed in the main text, this lowest order expansion sees no effects of quantized field fluctuations and shows complete decoupling of harmonic modes. Going to higher order ing 0N, we immediately find...

  5. [5]

    contributions vanish, since allO(g 3

  6. [6]

    (A8) will have an odd number of photonic operators

    combinations of the operators in Eq. (A8) will have an odd number of photonic operators. ForO(g 4 0), we find several nonvanishing terms that consitute a correction to the counting operator, ⟨ˆa′† k,σ(t)ˆa′ k,σ(t)⟩cor =g 4 0 ⟨ ˆT (2)† k,σ (t) ˆT (2) k,σ(t)⟩+⟨ ˆT (1)† k,σ (t) ˆT (3a) k,σ (t)⟩+⟨ ˆT (3a)† k,σ (t) ˆT (1) k,σ(t)⟩ +⟨ ˆT (1)† k,σ (t) ˆT (3b) k,σ...

  7. [7]

    Gorlach, S

    A. Gorlach, S. Malka, A. Karnieli, R. Dahan, E. Cohen, A. Pe’er, and I. Kaminer, Photonic quantum state tomog- raphy using free electrons, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 250801 (2024)

    2024

  8. [8]

    V. D. Giulio, M. Kociak, and F. J. G. de Abajo, Probing quantum optical excitations with fast electrons, Optica 6, 1524 (2019)

    2019

  9. [9]

    O. Kfir, V. D. Giulio, F. J. G. de Abajo, and C. Ropers, Optical coherence transfer mediated by free electrons, Science Advances7, eabf6380 (2021)

    2021

  10. [10]

    A. B. Hayun, O. Reinhardt, J. Nemirovsky, A. Karnieli, N. Rivera, and I. Kaminer, Shaping quantum photonic states using free electrons, Science Advances7, eabe4270 (2021)

    2021

  11. [11]

    Dahan, A

    R. Dahan, A. Gorlach, U. Haeusler, A. Karnieli, O. Eyal, P. Yousefi, M. Segev, A. Arie, G. Eisenstein, P. Hommel- hoff, and I. Kaminer, Imprinting the quantum statistics of photons on free electrons, Science373, eabj7128 (2021)

    2021

  12. [12]

    Dahan, G

    R. Dahan, G. Baranes, A. Gorlach, R. Ruimy, N. Rivera, and I. Kaminer, Creation of optical cat and gkp states using shaped free electrons, Phys. Rev. X13, 031001 (2023)

    2023

  13. [13]

    R. V. Gothelf, C. S. Lange, and L. B. Madsen, High-order harmonic generation in a crystal driven by quantum light, Phys. Rev. A111, 063105 (2025)

    2025

  14. [14]

    Fang, F.-X

    Y. Fang, F.-X. Sun, Q. He, and Y. Liu, Strong-field ion- ization of hydrogen atoms with quantum light, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 253201 (2023)

    2023

  15. [15]

    H. Liu, H. Zhang, X. Wang, and J. Yuan, Atomic dou- ble ionization with quantum light, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 123202 (2025)

    2025

  16. [16]

    Gorlach, M

    A. Gorlach, M. E. Tzur, M. Birk, M. Kr¨ uger, N. Rivera, O. Cohen, and I. Kaminer, High-harmonic generation driven by quantum light, Nature Physics19, 1689 (2023)

    2023

  17. [17]

    Even Tzur, M

    M. Even Tzur, M. Birk, A. Gorlach, M. Kr¨ uger, I. Kaminer, and O. Cohen, Photon-statistics force in ultrafast electron dynamics, Nature Photonics17, 501 (2023)

    2023

  18. [18]

    M. E. Tzur, M. Birk, A. Gorlach, I. Kaminer, M. Kr¨ uger, and O. Cohen, Generation of squeezed high-order har- monics, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 033079 (2024)

    2024

  19. [19]

    Lewenstein, M

    M. Lewenstein, M. F. Ciappina, E. Pisanty, J. Rivera- Dean, P. Stammer, T. Lamprou, and P. Tzallas, Gener- ation of optical Schr¨ odinger cat states in intense laser– matter interactions, Nature Physics17, 1104 (2021)

    2021

  20. [20]

    Rasputnyi, Z

    A. Rasputnyi, Z. Chen, M. Birk, O. Cohen, I. Kaminer, M. Kr¨ uger, D. Seletskiy, M. Chekhova, and F. Tani, High- harmonic generation by a bright squeezed vacuum, Na- ture Physics20, 1960 (2024)

    1960

  21. [21]

    Lemieux, S

    S. Lemieux, S. A. Jalil, D. N. Purschke, N. Boroumand, T. J. Hammond, D. Villeneuve, A. Naumov, T. Brabec, and G. Vampa, Photon bunching in high-harmonic emis- sion controlled by quantum light, Nature Photonics19, 767 (2025)

    2025

  22. [22]

    M. E. Tzur, C. Mor, N. Yaffe, M. Birk, A. Rasput- nyi, O. Kneller, I. Nisim, I. Kaminer, M. Chekhova, M. Krueger, M. Ivanov, N. Dudovich, and O. Cohen, Attosecond-resolved quantum fluctuations of light and matter (2025), arXiv:2511.18362 [physics.optics]

    arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    Lewenstein, N

    M. Lewenstein, N. Baldelli, U. Bhattacharya, J. Biegert, 25 M. F. Ciappina, T. Grass, P. T. Grochowski, A. S. John- son, T. Lamprou, A. S. Maxwell, A. Ord´ o˜ nez, E. Pisanty, J. Rivera-Dean, P. Stammer, and P. Tzallas, Attosecond physics and quantum information science, inProceedings of the 8th International Conference on Attosecond Sci- ence and Technol...

    2024

  24. [24]

    Gorlach, O

    A. Gorlach, O. Neufeld, N. Rivera, O. Cohen, and I. Kaminer, The quantum-optical nature of high har- monic generation, Nature Communications11, 4598 (2020)

    2020

  25. [25]

    Rivera-Dean, P

    J. Rivera-Dean, P. Stammer, A. S. Maxwell, T. Lamprou, A. F. Ord´ o˜ nez, E. Pisanty, P. Tzallas, M. Lewenstein, and M. F. Ciappina, Nonclassical states of light after high- harmonic generation in semiconductors: A bloch-based perspective, Phys. Rev. B109, 035203 (2024)

    2024

  26. [26]

    Stammer, J

    P. Stammer, J. Rivera-Dean, A. Maxwell, T. Lamprou, A. Ord´ o˜ nez, M. F. Ciappina, P. Tzallas, and M. Lewen- stein, Quantum Electrodynamics of Intense Laser-Matter Interactions: A Tool for Quantum State Engineering, PRX Quantum4, 010201 (2023)

    2023

  27. [27]

    Rivera-Dean, H

    J. Rivera-Dean, H. B. Crispin, P. Stammer, T. Lamprou, E. Pisanty, M. Kr¨ uger, P. Tzallas, M. Lewenstein, and M. F. Ciappina, Squeezed states of light after high-order harmonic generation in excited atomic systems, Phys. Rev. A110, 063118 (2024)

    2024

  28. [28]

    de-la Pe˜ na, O

    S. de-la Pe˜ na, O. Neufeld, M. Even Tzur, O. Cohen, H. Appel, and A. Rubio, Quantum electrodynamics in high-harmonic generation: Multitrajectory ehrenfest and exact quantum analysis, Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation21, 283 (2025)

    2025

  29. [29]

    Stammer, J

    P. Stammer, J. Rivera-Dean, A. S. Maxwell, T. Lam- prou, J. Arg¨ uello-Luengo, P. Tzallas, M. F. Ciappina, and M. Lewenstein, Entanglement and Squeezing of the Optical Field Modes in High Harmonic Generation, Phys- ical Review Letters132, 143603 (2024)

    2024

  30. [30]

    Rivera-Dean, P

    J. Rivera-Dean, P. Stammer, A. S. Maxwell, T. Lamprou, E. Pisanty, P. Tzallas, M. Lewenstein, and M. F. Ciap- pina, Quantum-optical analysis of high-order harmonic generation in h 2 + molecules, Phys. Rev. A109, 033706 (2024)

    2024

  31. [31]

    Rivera-Dean, T

    J. Rivera-Dean, T. Lamprou, E. Pisanty, P. Stam- mer, A. F. Ord´ o˜ nez, A. S. Maxwell, M. F. Ciappina, M. Lewenstein, and P. Tzallas, Strong laser fields and their power to generate controllable high-photon-number coherent-state superpositions, Phys. Rev. A105, 033714 (2022)

    2022

  32. [32]

    Pizzi, A

    A. Pizzi, A. Gorlach, N. Rivera, A. Nunnenkamp, and I. Kaminer, Light emission from strongly driven many- body systems, Nature Physics19, 551 (2023)

    2023

  33. [33]

    C. S. Lange, T. Hansen, and L. B. Madsen, Electron- correlation-induced nonclassicality of light from high- order harmonic generation, Physical Review A109, 033110 (2024)

    2024

  34. [34]

    C. S. Lange and L. B. Madsen, Hierarchy of approxima- tions for describing quantum light from high-harmonic generation: A Fermi-Hubbard-model study, Phys. Rev. A111, 013113 (2025)

    2025

  35. [35]

    C. S. Lange, T. Hansen, and L. B. Madsen, Excitonic enhancement of squeezed light in quantum-optical high- harmonic generation from a Mott insulator, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 043603 (2025)

    2025

  36. [36]

    S. Yi, N. D. Klimkin, G. G. Brown, O. Smirnova, S. Patchkovskii, I. Babushkin, and M. Ivanov, Genera- tion of massively entangled bright states of light during harmonic generation in resonant media, Phys. Rev. X15, 011023 (2025)

    2025

  37. [37]

    F. H. M. Faisal, Multiple absorption of laser photons by atoms, Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics6, L89 (1973)

    1973

  38. [38]

    Bhattacharya, T

    U. Bhattacharya, T. Lamprou, A. S. Maxwell, A. Ord´ o˜ nez, E. Pisanty, J. Rivera-Dean, P. Stammer, M. F. Ciappina, M. Lewenstein, and P. Tzallas, Strong– laser–field physics, non–classical light states and quan- tum information science, Reports on Progress in Physics 86, 094401 (2023)

    2023

  39. [39]

    Stammer, Absence of quantum optical coherence in high harmonic generation, Physical Review Research6, L032033 (2024)

    P. Stammer, Absence of quantum optical coherence in high harmonic generation, Physical Review Research6, L032033 (2024)

    2024

  40. [40]

    Stammer, J

    P. Stammer, J. Rivera-Dean, M. F. Ciappina, and M. Lewenstein, Weak measurement in strong laser field physics (2025), arXiv:2508.09048 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Sundaram and P

    B. Sundaram and P. W. Milonni, High-order harmonic generation: Simplified model and relevance of single- atom theories to experiment, Phys. Rev. A41, 6571 (1990)

    1990

  42. [42]

    Stammer, J

    P. Stammer, J. Rivera-Dean, and M. Lewenstein, Theory of quantum optics and optical coherence in high harmonic generation (2025), arXiv:2504.13287 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    Theidel, V

    D. Theidel, V. Cotte, R. Sondenheimer, V. Shiriaeva, M. Froidevaux, V. Severin, A. Merdji-Larue, P. Mosel, S. Fr¨ ohlich, K.-A. Weber, U. Morgner, M. Kovacev, J. Biegert, and H. Merdji, Evidence of the quantum opti- cal nature of high-harmonic generation, PRX Quantum 5, 040319 (2024)

    2024

  44. [44]

    C. S. Lange,Echoes of Correlations: Quantum-Optical High-Order Harmonic Generation from Strongly Corre- lated Systems, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Aarhus University (2025)

    2025

  45. [45]

    M. O. Scully and M. S. Zubairy,Quantum Optics(Cam- bridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997)

    1997

  46. [46]

    S. L. Braunstein and P. van Loock, Quantum information with continuous variables, Reviews of Modern Physics 77, 513 (2005)

    2005

  47. [47]

    Walls and G

    D. Walls and G. J. Milburn,Quantum Optics(Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008)

    2008

  48. [48]

    Gerry and P

    C. Gerry and P. Knight,Introductory Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004)

    2004

  49. [49]

    to 3×10 3 a.u

    where thex-axis is discretized from−3×10 3 a.u. to 3×10 3 a.u. with 1.5×10 5 points. The used time step isdt= 0.02 a.u., and absorbing boundary conditions are implemented by the multiplication of a masking function after every propagation step. For the results presented in this system, a value ofg 0 = 4×10 −8 a.u. is used, similar to the one used in [18, ...

  50. [50]

    Kira and S

    M. Kira and S. W. Koch,Semiconductor Quantum Op- tics, 1st ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012)

    2012

  51. [51]

    Gombk¨ ot˝ o, A

    ´A. Gombk¨ ot˝ o, A. Czirj´ ak, S. Varr´ o, and P. F¨ oldi, Quantum-optical model for the dynamics of high-order- harmonic generation, Phys. Rev. A94, 013853 (2016)

    2016

  52. [52]

    Gombk¨ ot˝ o, P

    A. Gombk¨ ot˝ o, P. F¨ oldi, and S. Varr´ o, Quantum-optical description of photon statistics and cross correlations in high-order harmonic generation, Phys. Rev. A104, 033703 (2021)

    2021

  53. [53]

    Cohen-Tannoudji, G

    C. Cohen-Tannoudji, G. Grynberg, and J. Dupont-Roc, Atom-Photon Interactions: Basic Processes and Applica- tions(Wiley, New York, 1998)

    1998

  54. [54]

    Floquet group theory and its application to selection 26 rules in harmonic generation, Nature Communications 10, 405 (2019)

    2019

  55. [55]

    Bauer,Computational Strong-Field Quantum Dynam- ics: Intense Light-Matter Interactions, De Gruyter Text- book Series (De Gruyter, Berlin / Boston, 2017) p

    D. Bauer,Computational Strong-Field Quantum Dynam- ics: Intense Light-Matter Interactions, De Gruyter Text- book Series (De Gruyter, Berlin / Boston, 2017) p. 290

    2017

  56. [56]

    F. H. L. Essler, H. Frahm, F. G¨ ohmann, A. Kl¨ umper, and V. E. Korepin,The One-Dimensional Hubbard Model (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005)

    2005

  57. [57]

    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

  58. [58]

    Hansen, S

    T. Hansen, S. V. B. Jensen, and L. B. Madsen, Correla- tion effects in high-order harmonic generation from finite systems, Phys. Rev. A105, 053118 (2022)

    2022

  59. [59]

    Hansen and L

    T. Hansen and L. B. Madsen, Doping effects in high- harmonic generation from correlated systems, Phys. Rev. B106, 235142 (2022)

    2022

  60. [60]

    C. S. Lange, T. Hansen, and L. B. Madsen, Noninteger high-order harmonic generation from extended correlated systems, Physical Review A109, 063103 (2024)

    2024

  61. [61]

    T. J. Park and J. C. Light, Unitary quantum time evolu- tion by iterative Lanczos reduction, J. Chem. Phys.85, 5870 (1986)

    1986

  62. [62]

    E. S. Smyth, J. S. Parker, and K. Taylor, Numerical integration of the time-dependent Schr¨ odinger equation for laser-driven helium, Comput. Phys. Commun.114, 1 (1998)

    1998

  63. [63]

    X. Guan, O. Zatsarinny, K. Bartschat, B. I. Schneider, J. Feist, and C. J. Noble, General approach to few-cycle intense laser interactions with complex atoms, Phys. Rev. A76, 053411 (2007)

    2007

  64. [64]

    A. L. Frapiccini, A. Hamido, S. Schr¨ oter, D. Pyke, F. Mota-Furtado, P. F. O’Mahony, J. Madro˜ nero, J. Ei- glsperger, and B. Piraux, Explicit schemes for time prop- agating many-body wave functions, Phys. Rev. A89, 023418 (2014)

    2014

  65. [65]

    U. L. Andersen, T. Gehring, C. Marquardt, and G. Leuchs, 30 years of squeezed light generation, Physica Scripta91, 053001 (2016)

    2016

  66. [66]

    N. D. Klimkin and M. Ivanov, Spontaneous sym- metry breaking in nonlinear superradiance (2025), arXiv:2511.03590 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  67. [67]

    C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro, Quantum sensing, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 035002 (2017)

    2017