Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 43 references

Continuous high-yield fast neutron generation with few-cycle laser pulses at 10 Hz for applications

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

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

Pith's one-line read A 23-mJ tabletop laser produces 180,000 neutrons per second continuously.

desk verdict A real performance record for a compact laser-driven neutron source, with one legitimate calibration caveat that does not sink the central claim. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.08197 v1 pith:XMF6CVKK submitted 2025-02-12 physics.plasm-ph physics.ins-det

L. Stuhl , P. Varmazyar , Z. Elekes , Z. Halász , T. Gilinger , M. Füle , M. Karnok , E. Buzás
show 14 more authors
A. P. Kovács B. Nagy A. Mohácsi B. Bíró L. Csedreki A. Fenyvesi Zs. Fülöp Z. Korkulu I. Kuti J. Csontos P. P. Geetha Sz. Tóth G. Szabó K. Osvay
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.plasm-phphysics.ins-det
keywords laser-drivenneutronsourcepitcher-catcherliquidsheettargetdeuteronaccelerationD-Dfusiontime-of-flightdetectionhighrepetitionratefew-cyclelaserpulses
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 reports a laser-driven neutron source that runs continuously at 10 Hz and produces $1.8\times10^5$ neutrons per second, with a laser-to-neutron conversion rate of $7.8\times10^5$ neutrons per joule, the highest recorded for a continuously operating laser with sub-100-fs pulses. The design sends 12-fs, 23-mJ pulses onto a 430-nm-thick heavy-water sheet, accelerating deuterium ions to about 1 MeV; those ions fuse with deuterium in a deuterated polyethylene catcher via $^2$H(d,n)$^3$He, releasing fast neutrons. The average yield over the longest run was $17{,}960\pm580$ neutrons per shot, with 5% RMS stability over hours of operation. If these numbers hold, compact tabletop lasers can serve as practical fast-neutron sources for radiobiology, neutron resonance spectroscopy, and materials testing without a large accelerator.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the pitcher-catcher geometry built on target-normal sheath acceleration (TNSA) from an ultrathin heavy-water liquid sheet, followed by $^2$H(d,n)$^3$He fusion in a deuterated polyethylene catcher. In TNSA, the intense laser field drives hot electrons through the target and the resulting charge-separation field at the rear surface accelerates deuterons; here the 430-nm sheet is renewed before every shot by two colliding liquid jets. The key diagnostic is the LILITH time-of-flight spectrometer, eight scintillators spanning nearly $180^\circ$, whose plutonium-beryllium calibration converts counts into absolute neutron yields. A 29-ns offline correction for the transit of 255-keV deuterons over a 14.3-cm path ties the measured deuteron spectra to the neutron time-of-flight, and Monte Carlo simulation using the measured deuteron spectrum reproduces the yield and the forward/backward angular peaking.

What would settle it

Run the same pitcher-catcher configuration with calibrated activation foils (for example indium or copper) placed at fixed angles around the catcher, and compare the induced activity with the absolute neutron fluence implied by LILITH's plutonium-beryllium-based efficiency; a factor-of-four mismatch would show which detector calibration is correct and would rescale the claimed $1.8\times10^5$ neutrons/s and $7.8\times10^5$ neutrons/J accordingly.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central result is that a pitcher-catcher neutron source can be driven continuously by a few-cycle, millijoule-level laser: 12-fs, 23-mJ pulses at 10 Hz strike a continuously renewed 430-nm heavy-water sheet, and target-normal sheath acceleration pushes deuterons to cut-off energies around 1 MeV. Those deuterons hit a deuterated polyethylene catcher, where $^2$H(d,n)$^3$He fusion yields an average of $17{,}960\pm580$ neutrons per shot, corresponding to $1.8\times10^5$ neutrons/s and $7.8\times10^5$ neutrons/J. The measured neutron energies and angular distribution, peaked forward and backward from a 0.65-cm$^2$ source, match Monte Carlo simulations built from the measured deuteron spectrum, with roughly 255-keV deuterons contributing most of the yield; only $1.59\pm0.07\%$ of neutrons come from the pitcher target, and no 14.1-MeV tritium-fusion neutrons are observed. The authors take the four-times-higher readings of the bubble detector spectrometer to be a calibration artifact of that device and conservatively report the time-of-flight values.

Load-bearing premise

The absolute neutron yield and the record conversion rate rest on the LILITH detector efficiency calibration made with a plutonium-beryllium source; if that calibration is systematically wrong, every absolute number shifts, and the paper itself notes that the independent bubble detectors read four times higher.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A 10-Hz source that runs for several hours with 5% RMS stability can sustain long irradiations without target replacement, making dosimetry and scheduling practical.
  • The measured flux of $1.2\times10^5$ neutrons/cm$^2$/s at 1 mm behind the catcher is sufficient to initiate radiobiological studies with the source.
  • Only $1.59\pm0.07\%$ of the neutrons originate from the pitcher, so catcher design and catcher lifetime dominate the useful yield.
  • The absence of 14.1-MeV tritium-fusion neutrons leaves a comparatively clean 2.45-MeV neutron spectrum for applications such as neutron resonance spectroscopy.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the fourfold gap between LILITH and the bubble detectors reflects an absolute-efficiency underestimate in the time-of-flight calibration, the true yield could be near $7\times10^5$ neutrons/s; the paper's record would then be a lower bound rather than an overstatement.
  • The same liquid-sheet target technology should transfer to higher repetition rates; at 1 kHz with unchanged per-shot yield the architecture would extrapolate to roughly $10^7$ neutrons/s, approaching small accelerator-based sources.
  • The observed catcher surface degradation points to catcher lifetime as the next practical limit; a moving or renewing catcher, such as a rotating deuterated tape, could extend continuous operation beyond the demonstrated several-hour runs.
  • A straightforward next experiment is an activation-foil measurement at several fixed angles, which would settle the absolute calibration question without changing the source.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a laser-driven pitcher-catcher neutron source using 12 fs, 23 mJ pulses at 10 Hz focused on a 430-nm-thick D2O liquid sheet, producing deuterons that induce 2H(d,n)3He fusion in a deuterated polyethylene catcher. The authors claim an average yield of 17,960 ± 580 neutrons per shot (1.8×10^5 n/s) and a laser-to-neutron conversion rate of 7.8×10^5 n/J, stated to be the highest for continuously operating sub-100 fs lasers. The claims are supported by time-of-flight measurements with the LILITH spectrometer, a bubble-detector cross-check, a no-catcher control run, and energy-angle comparison with D(d,n) kinematics.

Significance. If the absolute yield and conversion rate are validated, this is a substantial advance for table-top, high-repetition-rate fast neutron sources and their applications in radiobiology, materials research, and neutron spectroscopy. The strengths of the paper include the long continuous operation (79,808 shots in the main run), the quantitative stability analysis (5% RMS), the use of two detector systems, the conservative decision to report the lower time-of-flight yields, the catcher-removal control that bounds direct pitcher neutrons at 1.59%, and the detailed energy-angle comparison against known D(d,n) kinematics. The principal weakness is the absolute calibration of the primary detector at the 2.45 MeV neutron energy, which is not independently verified in situ.

major comments (3)
  1. [LILITH calibration and BDS comparison] The absolute yields and conversion rate rest on the LILITH detection efficiency, which was calibrated using a PuBe source whose neutron spectrum extends to about 10 MeV with a mean near 4.5 MeV, whereas the signal neutrons are 2.45 MeV D-D neutrons. No in-situ calibration with a mono-energetic 2.5 MeV source is described, so the stated 5% systematic uncertainty in intrinsic efficiency and detection threshold is not demonstrated at the relevant energy. The independent bubble detector spectrometer gave values four times higher, and the manuscript attributes this to BDS calibration ("probably due to the calibration of our BDS") without presenting a measurement that determines which absolute scale is correct. Because the headline yields of 1.8×10^5 n/s and 7.8×10^5 n/J inherit directly from the LILITH efficiency, the central claim requires either an in-situ 2.5 MeV calibration of LILITH or a detailed cross-calibration that resolves the factor-of-four discrepancy.
  2. [Neutron yields and 4π extrapolation] The paragraph "Neutron yields were determined..." states that the quoted yields "represent the total production averaged over the 4π solid angle, taking into account the anisotropic neutron distribution," but it does not specify the reduction formula that converts the counts recorded by the eight detectors at different angles and distances into an absolute total yield. The solid-angle weighting, the assumed angular distribution, and the propagation of detector-efficiency uncertainties are not given, which makes the central yield number non-reproducible from the text. The authors should provide the explicit formula and the angular-distribution model, or give a reference where the full reduction is described.
  3. [Timing offset and neutron energy assignment] The offline 29 ns timing correction is derived from the simulated neutron yield, which uses the average deuteron spectrum and the 2H(d,n)3He cross section in Geant4, and this corrected timing is then used to compute neutron energies that are compared with D(d,n) kinematics in Fig. 4(c). Because the same simulation fixes the energy scale against which agreement is claimed, the energy-angle agreement is not an independent confirmation of the reaction channel. The authors should quantify how the fitted energy centroids and the reported yields would vary if the 29 ns offset were changed within its uncertainty, and ideally anchor the absolute timing with a direct measurement rather than a simulation-based correction.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Title] The arXiv title contains a typo ("few-cy cle"); the journal version should fix this.
  2. [BDS comparison paragraph] The sentence "This is consistent with the report of other study [24], although the discrepancy here is two orders of magnitude smaller" is unclear: it does not specify which pair of detectors is being compared between the present work and Ref. [24]. Please rephrase to state exactly what is being compared.
  3. [Energy resolution statement] The claim "the energy resolution is around 1% for M and 1.5% for XL detectors at 2.5 MeV" does not specify whether this is ΔE/E in percent or an absolute energy width; please define the quantity.
  4. [Conversion rate definition] The paper does not explicitly define the laser-to-neutron conversion rate; please state whether it is total neutrons per laser pulse energy or per unit of laser power on target, including whether the 23 mJ on-target energy or the energy in the focal spot is used.
  5. [Figure 5(b) normalization] The caption of Fig. 5(b) states that "LILITH M counts are also normalized to those of the XL detectors," but the normalization procedure is not described in the text; a brief explanation is needed for the reader to interpret the comparison.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the neutron yield is measured from ToF counts independently of the deuteron-spectrum simulation, and the self-citations for calibration are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, the absolute neutron yield and conversion rate, is derived from LILITH time-of-flight counts integrated over detector acceptance, not from the Geant4 simulation of the deuteron spectrum. The simulated neutron yield is used to identify the dominant deuteron energy (255 keV) and to apply a 29 ns timing offset for the pitcher-to-catcher flight time; this is a mild self-consistency loop because the same simulated energy is later used in the kinematic comparison of corrected neutron energies. However, the offset is a constant applied to all detectors and is derived from an independently measured deuteron spectrum together with literature fusion cross sections, not fitted to the neutron data. It does not set the reported yield, which is based on raw event counts with stated detector-efficiency calibrations. The bubble detector spectrometer provides a second, independent measurement, and the paper transparently reports that the BDS values are four times higher while conservatively reporting the ToF-based values. Self-citations for detector calibration and prior liquid-sheet work are part of an ongoing experimental program and do not carry the derivation by themselves; the calibrations are external source-based measurements, not internally defined quantities. No prediction in the paper reduces by construction to its inputs, so no circular step meets the required evidentiary standard.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard nuclear data, a Monte Carlo transport code, measured laser and target parameters, and a detector calibration. No new physical objects are introduced. The two manual analysis choices, the 29 ns timing offset and the ToF integration windows, are motivated by kinematics and measured ToF structure; they are not fitted to the headline neutron yield.

free parameters (2)
  • Deuteron time-of-flight offset = 29 ns
    An offline timing correction applied to all neutron events, based on the simulated 255 keV deuterons over a 14.3 cm path. This is a single correction for a broad deuteron spectrum and affects absolute neutron energies and placement of the integration windows.
  • Neutron ToF integration windows = 110-500 ns (M), 330-1400 ns (XL)
    Hand-chosen ranges used to integrate neutron counts from the ToF distributions after excluding the photon peak; the window edges affect the scattered-neutron fraction and the total yield.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The literature D(d,n)He3 differential cross section (Brown and Jarmie 1990) describes fusion yields for deuteron energies up to about 1 MeV.
    Used in the Geant4 simulation to convert the measured deuteron spectrum into the simulated neutron yield and angular distribution; appears in Fig. 2(b) and references [39,40].
  • domain assumption Geant4 accurately models neutron transport, scattering, and detector response in the experimental hall.
    The simulation is used to derive the 255 keV dominant deuteron energy, the 29 ns timing offset, and the 4π total yield from detector counts; see simulation text near Fig. 2(b) and Fig. 5(b).
  • domain assumption The deuterated polyethylene catcher stops the incoming deuteron beam, so all significant fusion happens in the catcher rather than in surrounding material.
    The no-catcher background run bounds direct pitcher neutrons at 1.59 percent, but no explicit stopping-power calculation for the 1 mm dPE tablet is presented.
  • domain assumption The LILITH detector efficiency calibration using a PuBe source is transferable to 2.5 MeV D-D fusion neutrons.
    Absolute yield extraction depends on this calibration; the independent bubble detector gives four times higher values, which the paper attributes to bubble detector calibration rather than to LILITH.
  • standard math Relativistic two-body kinematics for the D(d,n)He3 reaction give the expected neutron energy versus laboratory angle.
    Used to compare fitted neutron peak centroids to calculated values in Fig. 4(c), confirming the reaction identification.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Continuous high-yield fast neutron generation with few-cycle laser pulses at 10 Hz for applications." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XMF6CVKK

@misc{pith2026250208197,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Continuous high-yield fast neutron generation with few-cycle laser pulses at 10 Hz for applications},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XMF6CVKK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.08197}
}
abstract

We present a laser-based neutron source that produces $1.8 \times 10^5$ neutrons/s with a conversion rate of $7.8 \times 10^5$ neutrons/J. Laser pulses of 12 fs and 23 mJ were focused onto a 430-nm-thick heavy water liquid sheet at a 10 Hz repetition rate. The resulting peak intensity of $4 \times 10^{18}$ W/cm$^2$ accelerated deuterium ions from the target rear side to a kinetic energy of 1 MeV. This deuteron beam induced $^{2}$H(d,n)$^{3}$He fusion reactions in a deuterated polyethylene target, producing fast neutrons. The neutron yield was measured using two independent detection systems: the LILITH time-of-flight spectrometer, consisting of eight plastic scintillators covering nearly $180^\circ$, and a calibrated bubble detector spectrometer. The neutron yield per laser shot is 35 times higher than that recently achieved by lasers with comparable pulse energies, while the conversion rate is the highest ever achieved by continuously operating, sub-100 fs lasers. The generated neutrons are emitted from an area of 0.65 cm$^2$ corresponding to the deuteron beam spot on the catcher. Their angular distribution is peaked in forward and backward directions in agreement with the literature data on the angular distribution of $^{2}$H(d,n)$^{3}$He reaction. The system operated continuously for several hours per day with an unprecedented stability of 5%.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.08197 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Monitoring setup for deuterons and heavy water [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) Typical image captured by the forward TPS cam [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) Measured ToF data as a function of time for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Energy distribution of neutrons detected by the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    In conclusion, we report a new laser-based neutron source that reaches a yield of 1

    2 × 105 neutrons/cm2/ s, which is sufficient to initiate radiobiological studies [ 20]. In conclusion, we report a new laser-based neutron source that reaches a yield of 1 . 8 × 105 neutrons/s us- ing only 23 mJ laser pulses at a repetition rate of 10 Hz. The generated fast neutrons were measured with two in- dependent detection systems, confirming the relia...

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    A. Yogo, Y. Arikawa, Y. Abe, S. R. Mirfayzi, T. Hayakawa, K. Mima, and R. Kodama, Ad- vances in laser-driven neutron sources and applications, The European Physical Journal A 59, 191 (2023)

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    Perkins, B

    L. Perkins, B. Logan, M. Rosen, M. Perry, T. D. de la Ru- bia, N. Ghoniem, T. Ditmire, P. Springer, and S. Wilks, The investigation of high intensity laser driven micro neu- tron sources for fusion materials research at high fluence, Nuclear Fusion 40, 1 (2000)

    work page 2000

  4. [4]

    M. Roth, S. Vogel, M. Bourke, J. Fernandez, M. Mocko, et al. , Assessment of laser-driven pulsed neutron sources for poolside neutron-based advanced NDE-A pathway to LANSCE-like characterization at INL, Los Alamos Na- tional Lab. Los Alamos, NM, U.S.A., report No. LA-UR- 17-23190 (2017)

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    C. M. Brenner, S. R. Mirfayzi, D. R. Rusby, C. Armstrong, A. Alejo, L. A. Wilson, R. Clarke, H. Ahmed, N. M. H. Butler, D. Haddock, et al. , Laser-driven x-ray and neutron source development for industrial applications of plasma accelerators, Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion 58, 014039 (2016)

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Zimmer, M., R¨ osch, T. F., Scheuren, S., Seu- pel, T., J¨ ager, T., Kohl, J., Hofmann, D., Schau- mann, G., and Roth, M., Assessing the poten- tial of upcoming laser-driven neutron sources and their practical applications for industry and society, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 139, 1107 (2024)

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    T. Mori, A. Yogo, Y. Arikawa, T. Hayakawa, S. R. Mirfayzi, Z. Lan, T. Wei, Y. Abe, M. Nakai, et al. , Feasibility study of laser-driven neu- tron sources for pharmaceutical applications, High Power Laser Science and Engineering 11, e20 (2023)

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Canova et al

    F. Canova et al. , Laser-driven fast neutron sources for green energy applications, High Power Laser Science and Engineeering Submitted, 0 (2025). 6

    work page 2025

Show all 43 references
  1. [9]

    S. R. Mirfayzi, M. Gryaznevich, O. Lonsdale, G. Nay- lor, Y. Takase, and D. Kingham, Recent devel- opments on plasma based neutron sources from microscopic innovations to meter-scale applications, Japanese Journal of Applied Physics 64, 010002 (2025)

    2025

  2. [10]

    Disdier, J.-P

    L. Disdier, J.-P. Gar¸ connet, G. Malka, and J.-L. Mique l, Fast neutron emission from a high-energy ion beam produced by a high-intensity subpicosecond laser pulse, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1454 (1999)

    1999

  3. [11]

    P. A. Norreys, A. P. Fews, F. N. Beg, A. R. Bell, A. E. Dangor, P. Lee, M. B. Nelson, H. Schmidt, M. Tatarakis, and M. D. Cable, Neutron production from picosecond laser irradi- ation of deuterated targets at intensities of 145 ◦, Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion 40, 175 (1998)

    1998

  4. [12]

    Kitagawa, Y

    Y. Kitagawa, Y. Mori, R. Hanayama, S. Okihara, K. Fu- jita, K. Ishii, T. Kawashima, N. Sato, T. Sekine, R. Ya- suhara, et al. , Efficient fusion neutron generation us- ing a 10-TW high-repetition rate diode-pumped laser, Plasma and Fusion Research 6, 1306006 (2011)

    2011

  5. [13]

    Ditmire, J

    T. Ditmire, J. Zweiback, V. P. Yanovsky, T. E. Cowan, G. Hays, and K. B. Wharton, Nuclear fusion from ex- plosions of femtosecond laser-heated deuterium clusters, Nature 398, 489 (1999)

    1999

  6. [14]

    Willingale, G

    L. Willingale, G. M. Petrov, A. Maksimchuk, J. Davis, R. R. Freeman, A. S. Joglekar, T. Matsuoka, C. D. Murphy, V. M. Ovchinnikov, A. G. R. Thomas, et al. , Comparison of bulk and pitcher-catcher targets for laser-driven neutron production, Physics of Plasmas 18, 10.1063/1.362...

    2011 doi

  7. [15]

    W. Bang, G. Dyer, H. J. Quevedo, A. C. Bernstein, E. Gaul, M. Donovan, and T. Ditmire, Optimization of the neutron yield in fusion plasmas produced by Coulomb explosions of deuterium clusters irradiated by a petawatt laser, Phys. Rev. E 87, 023106 (2013)

    2013

  8. [16]

    A. Yogo, Z. Lan, Y. Arikawa, Y. Abe, S. R. Mir- fayzi, T. Wei, T. Mori, D. Golovin, T. Hayakawa, N. Iwata, et al. , Laser-driven neutron genera- tion realizing single-shot resonance spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. X 13, 011011 (2023)

    2023

  9. [17]

    M. M. G¨ unther, O. N. Rosmej, P. Tavana, M. Gyrdy- mov, A. Skobliakov, A. Kantsyrev, S. Z¨ ahter, N. G. Borisenko, A. Pukhov, and N. E. Andreev, Forward- looking insights in laser-generated ultra-intense γ-ray and neutron sources for nuclear application and science, Nature Co...

    2022

  10. [18]

    Osvay, P

    K. Osvay, P. K. Singh, P. Varmazyar, M. F¨ ule, T. Gilinger, B. Kis, L. Lehotai, B. Nagy, L. Stuhl, Z. Elekes, et al. , Fast neutron generation with few- cycle, relativistic laser pulses at 1Hz repetition rate, Scientific Reports 14, 25302 (2024)

    2024

  11. [19]

    Prencipe, J

    I. Prencipe, J. Fuchs, S. Pascarelli, et al. , Targets for high repetition rate laser facil- ities: needs, challenges and perspectives, High Power Laser Science and Engineering 5, e17 (2017)

    2017

  12. [20]

    E., F¨ ule, M., Bir´ o, B.,et al

    Osvay, K., Stuhl, L., Varmazyar, P., Gilinger, T., Elekes, Z., Fenyvesi, A., Hideghethy, K., Szabo, R. E., F¨ ule, M., Bir´ o, B.,et al. , Towards a 10 10 n/s neutron source with kHz repetition rate, few-cycle laser pulses, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 139, 574 (2024)

    2024

  13. [21]

    Leli` evre, E

    R. Leli` evre, E. Catrix, S. Valli` eres, S. Fourmaux, A. Al- laoua, V. Anthonippillai, P. Antici, Q. Ducasse, and J. Fuchs, High repetition-rate 0.5 Hz broadband neu- tron source driven by the advanced laser light source, Physics of Plasmas 31, 093106 (2024)

    2024

  14. [22]

    J. Hah, G. M. Petrov, J. A. Nees, Z.-H. He, M. D. Hammig, K. Krushelnick, and A. G. R. Thomas, High repetition-rate neutron generation by several- mJ, 35 fs pulses interacting with free-flowing D 2O, Applied Physics Letters 109, 144102 (2016)

    2016

  15. [23]

    Treffert, C

    F. Treffert, C. B. Curry, T. Ditmire, G. D. Glenn, H. J. Quevedo, M. Roth, C. Schoenwaelder, M. Zimmer, S. H. Glenzer, and M. Gauthier, Towards high-repetition-rate fast neutron sources using novel enabling technologies, Instruments 5, 38 (2021)

    2021

  16. [24]

    B. M. Knight, C. M. Gautam, C. R. Stoner, et al. , Detailed characterization of kHz-rate laser-driven fusio n at a thin liquid sheet with a neutron detection suite, High Power Laser Science and Engineering 12, e2 (2024)

    2024

  17. [25]

    J. Hah, J. A. Nees, M. D. Hammig, K. Krushelnick, and A. G. R. Thomas, Characterization of a high repetition-rate laser-driven short-pulsed neutron sourc e, Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion 60, 054011 (2018)

    2018

  18. [26]

    F¨ ule, A

    M. F¨ ule, A. P. Kov´ acs, T. Gilinger, M. Karnok, P. Ga´ al, S. Figul, G. Marowsky, and K. Osvay, Development of an ultrathin liquid sheet target for laser ion accel- eration at high repetition rates in the kilohertz range, High Power Laser Science and Engineering 12, e37 (2024)

    2024

  19. [27]

    Treffert, C

    F. Treffert, C. B. Curry, H.-G. J. Chou, C. J. Criss- man, D. P. DePonte, F. Fiuza, G. D. Glenn, R. C. Hollinger, R. Nedbailo, J. Park, et al. , High-repetition- rate, multi-MeV deuteron acceleration from converging heavy water microjets at laser intensities of 10 21 W/cm2, App...

    2022

  20. [28]

    Stuhl, M

    L. Stuhl, M. Sasano, J. Gao, Y. Hirai, K. Yako, T. Wakasa, D. Ahn, H. Baba, A. Chilug, S. Franchoo, et al. , Study of spin- isospin responses of radioactive nuclei with the background-reduced neutron spectrometer, pandora, Nuclear Instruments and Methods B 463, 189 (2020)

    2020

  21. [29]

    S. Toth, T. Stanislauskas, I. Balciunas, R. Bu- driunas, J. Adamonis, R. Danilevicius, K. Viskon- tas, D. Lengvinas, G. Veitas, D. Gadonas, et al. , Sylos lasers – the frontier of few-cycle, multi- tw, khz lasers for ultrafast applications at extreme light infrastructure attos...

    2020

  22. [30]

    Osvay et al

    K. Osvay et al. , Enhancing of deuteron acceleration with spectral phase modulation of few-cycle laser pulses, in Advanced Accelerator Concept Workshop, Naperville, IL, USA (2024)

    2024

  23. [31]

    Ziegler, D

    T. Ziegler, D. Albach, C. Bernert, S. Bock, F.-E. Brack, T. E. Cowan, N. P. Dover, M. Garten, L. Gaus, R. Gebhardt, et al. , Proton beam quality enhancement by spectral phase control of a PW-class laser system, Scientific Reports 11, 7338 (2021)

    2021

  24. [32]

    Agostinelli, J

    S. Agostinelli, J. Allison, K. Amako, J. Apostolakis, H. Araujo, P. Arce, M. Asai, D. Axen, S. Baner- jee, G. Barrand, et al. , Geant4—a simulation toolkit, Nuclear Instruments and Methods A 506, 250 (2003)

    2003

  25. [33]

    Schreiber, F

    J. Schreiber, F. Bell, and Z. Najmudin, Op- timization of relativistic laser–ion acceleration, High Power Laser Science and Engineering 2, e41 (2014)

    2014

  26. [34]

    Z. Peng, Z. Cao, X. Liu, Y. Shou, J. Zhao, S. Chen, Y. Gao, P. Wang, Z. Mei, Z. Pan, and et al., A comprehensive diagnostic system of ultra-thin liquid sheet targets, High Power Laser Science and Engineering 12, e26 (2024) . 7

    2024

  27. [35]

    Z. Cao, Z. Peng, Y. Shou, J. Zhao, S. Chen, Y. Gao, J. Liu, P. Wang, Z. Mei, Z. Pan, et al. , Vibra- tion and jitter of free-flowing thin liquid sheets as target for high-repetition-rate laser-ion acceleration, Frontiers in Physics 11, 1172075 (2023)

    2023

  28. [36]

    Higginson, R

    D. Higginson, R. Leli` evre, L. Vassura, M. Gugiu, M. Borghesi, L. Bernstein, D. L. Bleuel, B. L. Goldblum, A. Green, F. Hannachi, et al. , Global characterization of a laser-generated neutron source, Journal of Plasma Physics 90, 905900308 (2024)

    2024

  29. [37]

    K. Zeil, S. D. Kraft, S. Bock, M. Bussmann, T. E. Cowan, T. Kluge, J. Metzkes, T. Richter, R. Sauer- brey, and U. Schramm, The scaling of proton en- ergies in ultrashort pulse laser plasma acceleration, New Journal of Physics 12, 045015 (2010)

    2010

  30. [38]

    Karsch, S

    S. Karsch, S. D¨ usterer, H. Schwoerer, F. Ewald, D. Habs, M. Hegelich, G. Pretzler, A. Pukhov, K. Witte, and R. Sauerbrey, High-intensity laser in- duced ion acceleration from heavy-water droplets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 015001 (2003)

    2003

  31. [39]

    W. N. Catford, Catkin: The Kinematics Programme in Excel (2019), accessed: February 3, 2025

    2019

  32. [40]

    N. Ying, B. B. Cox, B. K. Barnes, and A. W. Bar- rows, A study of the 2H(d, p )3H and 2H(d, n )3He re- actions and the excited state of 4He at 23.9 MeV, Nucl. Phys. A 206, 481 (1973)

    1973

  33. [41]

    R. E. Brown and N. Jarmie, Differential cross sec- tions at low energies for 2H(d, p )3H and 2H(d, n )3He, Phys. Rev. C 41, 1391 (1990)

    1990

  34. [43]

    S. Kar, A. Green, H. Ahmed, A. Alejo, A. P. L. Robinson, M. Cerchez, R. Clarke, D. Doria, S. Dorkings, J. Fernandez, et al. , Beamed neu- tron emission driven by laser accelerated light ions, New Journal of Physics 18, 053002 (2016)

    2016

  35. [118]

    6◦ (XL4)

    4◦ (XL3), 43 . 6◦ (XL4). All LILITH detectors were shielded with 5 cm of lead against X-rays and gamma rays. The light output of the LILITH detectors was calibrated using 137Cs, 60Co, and 22Na gamma sources, while their neutron detection efficiencies were determined with a pluto...

    2000

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.