Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 71 references

Strong-Field-Assisted X-ray Second Harmonic Generation

T0 review · 2 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A strong optical field can make gas-phase atoms emit x-ray second harmonic radiation — normally symmetry-forbidden — by driving the rescattering of core electrons that were excited by two x-ray photons.

desk verdict Novel mechanism, but the model potential as written cannot bind an electron at 870 eV, so the central simulation is not actually neon-like. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.10211 v4 pith:LKVN2RIH submitted 2024-11-15 physics.atom-ph physics.optics

Xinhua Xie This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.atom-phphysics.optics PACS 42.65.Ky32.80.Rm
keywords x-raysecondharmonicgenerationhighcore-electrondynamicstwo-photonexcitationsingle-active-electronapproximationtime-dependentSchrödingerequationrescatteringattosecondpulses
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

This paper proposes and simulates a way to generate x-ray second harmonic generation (SHG) in gas-phase atoms, where ordinary SHG is forbidden by inversion symmetry. The idea is to excite a 1s core electron with two x-ray photons tuned to a core-to-valence transition, then let an intense 800 nm laser field tunnel-ionize and accelerate that electron until it rescatters and recombines with the core hole, emitting photons near twice the x-ray frequency. The simulations show a broadband multi-peak spectrum with a sharp cutoff near Ip+3.17Up above the core ionization potential, a strong enhancement when the x-ray photon energy sits on the two-photon resonance, and a yield that grows quadratically with x-ray intensity. If the scheme works in practice, it would provide an element-specific gas-phase source of attosecond x-ray pulses and combine laser-driven attosecond technology with XFEL-based nonlinear x-ray science.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the strong-field rescattering of a core electron prepared by two-photon x-ray excitation, which the paper names HHG-XSHG. It is described as a four-step sequence: two-photon excitation of the 1s electron to a bound excited state, tunneling ionization by the optical laser, acceleration of the electron in the laser field, and recombination with the core hole. The spectrum is organized by the selection rule that only odd numbers of optical laser photons participate, so the emitted sidebands sit at 2ωX+(2n+1)ωL, and the cutoff is governed by the classical rescattering maximum Ip+3.17Up, where Ip is the core ionization potential and Up is the ponderomotive energy of the optical field. The calculation itself uses a two-dimensional time-dependent Schrödinger equation in the single-active-electron approximation with a soft-core potential, fitted to the neon 1s binding energy (870.2 eV) and the first excited state (about 4.9 eV) by two parameters, with Auger decay modelled as an imaginary part of the core-hole energy.

What would settle it

Measure the radiated spectrum near 865 eV from a neon gas target irradiated by an intense XFEL pulse at 432.7 eV (two-photon resonant for the 1s-to-3s transition in this model) together with an 800 nm laser at about 5.6×$10^{13}$ W/$cm^{2}$: the model predicts a broadband sideband structure at 2ωX+(2n+1)ωL with a cutoff near 870.2+3.17Up eV, that disappears when the optical laser is switched off, and that shifts upward in cutoff with increasing laser intensity. If the signal is absent, does not vanish with the laser, or does not show the predicted quadratic x-ray intensity scaling, the central claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a gas-phase atom can emit x-ray second harmonic radiation through a strong-field-assisted four-step process: two x-ray photons resonantly excite the 1s core electron into an excited bound state (in the model, a 2s-like state at about 4.9 eV binding energy); the intense optical laser field tunnel-ionizes this electron; the laser accelerates the liberated electron in the continuum; and the electron recombines with the 1s core hole, emitting radiation whose energy is about twice the x-ray photon energy. In the model atom, this produces a broadband spectrum with sidebands at 2ωX+(2n+1)ωL and a cutoff following the standard HHG law Ip+3.17Up. The paper demonstrates the process by numerically solving the two-dimensional time-dependent Schrödinger equation under the single-active-electron approximation, with a soft-core potential fitted to the neon 1s binding energy (870.2 eV) and the first excited state energy, and with Auger decay accounted for by an imaginary energy shift. The simulations show that on two-photon resonance the SHG signal exceeds the third-harmonic signal by about two orders of magnitude, and that the yield depends quadratically on the x-ray intensity up to about 8×$10^{16}$ W/$cm^{2}$.

Load-bearing premise

The predicted enhancement and cutoff rest on treating the core electron as a single active electron in a two-dimensional model atom whose two parameters are fitted to the neon 1s binding energy (870.2 eV) and first excited state (about 4.9 eV); if in real neon the two-photon excitation of the 1s electron is suppressed by the already-occupied valence shell, by electron correlation, or by the three-dimensional geometry, the x-ray second harmonic signal would not appear as calculated.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the HHG-XSHG process works as simulated, gas-phase atoms become viable x-ray SHG sources, removing the need for a non-centrosymmetric medium and extending SHG to isotropic gases.
  • The resonant enhancement at the two-photon core-to-valence transition makes the signal element-specific: tuning the x-ray photon energy selects which atomic species contributes, and dark states that are not reachable by single-photon absorption become accessible.
  • The broad bandwidth of the generated spectrum (over 50 eV in the simulations, potentially exceeding 1 keV with mid-infrared drivers) supports pulse trains with individual pulse durations below 40 attoseconds, or about 1.8 attoseconds with an extended bandwidth.
  • Because the emitted photon energy is set by the two-photon resonance, the scheme can be scaled to hard x-ray energies, for example krypton's 1s-to-5s transition near 14 keV driven by a 7 keV XFEL.
  • The intensity dependence and the laser-dressing shift of the resonance peak provide a built-in calibration of the optical field, and the time-frequency structure follows classical rescattering trajectories, confirming the four-step mechanism.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension the paper does not carry out is a full three-dimensional or multi-electron calculation of the same neon target: the single-active-electron model treats the excited electron as independent and lets it occupy a nominal '2s' state that in real neon is already occupied, so Pauli blocking and electron correlation could reduce the two-photon excitation yield, potentially cutting the
  • The paper leaves macroscopic phase-matching to future work; a concrete next step is to compute the HHG-XSHG yield as a function of gas pressure and interaction length, since the phase-matching techniques used in conventional HHG would determine whether the single-atom signal survives propagation through a realistic gas jet.
  • The laser-dressing shift of the two-photon resonance, observed here as a 0.4 eV offset between the scan maximum and the bare resonance, could be exploited as a non-invasive measurement of the focused optical laser intensity inside the x-ray interaction volume.
  • Because the process requires the optical laser to break inversion symmetry during recombination, the emitted x-ray beam may carry measurable polarization or angular-momentum fingerprints; measuring the SHG beam profile and polarization as a function of the relative x-ray and optical polarizations would test the underlying rescattering geometry beyond the spectrum alone.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a scheme for x-ray second harmonic generation (SHG) in gas-phase atoms, termed HHG-XSHG, in which a strong optical laser drives a core electron that has been excited by two x-ray photons into a bound state; after tunnel ionization and rescattering, recombination with the core hole emits radiation near twice the x-ray photon energy. The authors present two-dimensional time-dependent Schrödinger equation simulations using a soft-core potential, reporting multi-peak spectra around 865 eV, a cutoff consistent with Ip + 3.17Up, and quadratic scaling of the yield with x-ray intensity. The central claim is that this constitutes a theoretical demonstration of gas-phase x-ray SHG with a neon-like atom.

Significance. If the mechanism and simulations were correct, the scheme would be a significant step toward element-specific attosecond x-ray sources and a new nonlinear x-ray probe. The paper's strengths include direct TDSE simulation outputs, explicit comparison of on-resonance and off-resonance spectra, and the observation of the expected sideband structure and cutoff from rescattering. However, the model potential, as specified, cannot bind an electron at the claimed 870.2 eV, so the simulated spectra cannot be assigned to a neon-like 1s electron; the central physical interpretation therefore does not follow from the calculation.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section II] The soft-core potential is defined as V(x,y) = -exp(-a sqrt(x^2+y^2))/sqrt(x^2+y^2+b^2) with a=0.005827 and b=0.305. At the origin this potential has depth -1/b = -3.28 a.u. ≈ -89 eV, and at large distances it reduces to the 2D Coulomb potential -1/r. The 2D hydrogenic ground state with Z=1 lies at approximately -2 a.u. ≈ -54 eV, and the finite core cutoff only shifts the energy toward smaller binding. It is therefore impossible for this potential, as written, to support a bound state at -870.2 eV (-32 a.u.). The claim that this potential reproduces the neon 1s binding energy is numerically untenable, and this is a load-bearing error because the entire mechanism depends on the two-photon resonance between the 1s and 2s states at 865.4 eV.
  2. [Section III.A and Fig. 2] As a consequence of the potential calibration error, the simulated spectra in Figs. 2-4 cannot be interpreted as arising from a neon-like core electron. With an actual ground-state binding energy of only a few tens of eV, an x-ray photon energy of 432.7 eV would immediately ionize the electron by single-photon absorption, so the process studied in the simulation is not the resonant two-photon excitation picture claimed. The resonance peak near 432.3 eV in Fig. 4(c) therefore does not correspond to a 1s-to-2s two-photon resonance of a neon-like atom, and the central claim of resonant enhancement of x-ray SHG is not established.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Section III.A] The sentence "The green curve, representing the scenario without the optical laser, shows no second harmonic signal" is inconsistent with the figure caption, where the blue curve is the no-laser case and the green curve is the off-resonance case with laser.
  2. [Section II] The parameters a and b in the soft-core potential are given without units; the authors should state explicitly that they are in atomic units.
  3. [Sections II and III] The text refers to the first excited state both as the "2s state" in the model and as "neon's first excited 3s state"; the level assignment and its relation to the actual neon electronic configuration should be clarified.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the HHG-XSHG spectrum is a direct TDSE simulation output, and the only explicit fit is a post-hoc scaling check.

full rationale

The paper's central result is the simulated HHG-XSHG spectrum, obtained by numerically solving a 2D TDSE with a specified soft-core potential and external pulses. No input parameter is fitted to the output spectrum: the model potential is calibrated to external neon binding energies (870.2 eV for the 1s state and approximately 4.9 eV for the excited state), which are independent benchmarks, not the predicted SHG signal. The 'Fitted 0.0035IX^2' line in Fig. 4(b) is a post-hoc fit to the calculated yield curve that checks the expected quadratic x-ray intensity scaling; it does not generate or define the spectrum. The resonance photon energy of 432.7 eV is a direct consequence of the calibrated level spacing, not a fitted output, and the observed enhancement at resonance is a physical consequence of the model rather than a circular re-importation. Self-citations [34-38] are background references for SAE/TDSE methods and rescattering physics, accompanied by independent citations [30-33], and they are not load-bearing: no uniqueness theorem or contested premise rests on author-only prior work. The cutoff is interpreted using the standard Ip+3.17Up formula and classical trajectories after the TDSE spectrum is computed, so this is a consistency check rather than a derivation from the formula. Any concern about the numerical consistency of the potential parameters with the quoted 870.2 eV binding energy is a correctness or calibration issue, not a circularity issue, because the energy levels are inputs chosen to match external data, not outputs of the SHG prediction. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained with respect to the claimed prediction.

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

The ledger shows the model cost: the central mechanism is a known rescattering process, and the paper's contribution is the specific resonance and field combination. The simulation depends on a calibrated 2D single-active-electron atom and on standard strong-field approximations. No new physical entities are introduced; the main uncertainties are whether the SAE/2D model preserves the two-photon resonance enhancement and cutoff in real neon.

free parameters (4)
  • Soft-core potential parameters a and b = a = 0.005827, b = 0.305
    Hand-chosen to make the model's ground 1s binding energy 870.2 eV and first excited state binding energy about 4.9 eV, matching neon's 1s and 3s levels; central to the resonance condition.
  • Core-hole Auger decay rate (complex energy shift) = Not specified numerically; corresponds to a 2.4 fs lifetime
    Added to the TDSE to deplete the core-hole state over time; lifetime is taken from literature [39,40].
  • X-ray photon energy at two-photon resonance = 432.7 eV
    Chosen so that two x-ray photons equal the 1s to first excited state transition (865.4 eV) in the model; this is the key enhancement condition.
  • Pulse durations and laser intensity = 5 fs super-Gaussian; optical 0.56e14 W/cm2; x-ray 3.5e16 W/cm2
    Simulation inputs chosen to represent realistic XFEL and laser conditions; not fitted to the output, but they affect the spectrum and yield.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math The time-dependent Schrödinger equation governs the interaction
    Used throughout Section II; no proof needed.
  • domain assumption The single-active-electron approximation is valid for this process
    Section II; neglects multi-electron effects, acknowledged in Section III.D as a limitation.
  • domain assumption The 2D soft-core potential provides a neon-like model with correct 1s and first excited state binding energies
    Section II; parameters are fitted to binding energies, and no benchmark against 3D or full multi-electron calculations is provided.
  • domain assumption Auger decay can be modeled by an imaginary potential
    Section II; the real Auger process involves multi-electron dynamics not captured by an imaginary energy shift.
  • domain assumption Neglect of the Coulomb potential in classical rescattering trajectories is acceptable for interpreting the time-frequency spectrum
    Section III.B; standard for HHG, but it ignores Coulomb effects on returning trajectories.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Strong-Field-Assisted X-ray Second Harmonic Generation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LKVN2RIH

@misc{pith2026241110211,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Strong-Field-Assisted X-ray Second Harmonic Generation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LKVN2RIH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.10211}
}
read the original abstract

We theoretically demonstrate x-ray second harmonic generation (SHG) with strong-field-driven high harmonic generation (HHG) from core electrons in gas-phase atoms, highlighting its potential as a powerful spectroscopic tool for studying atomic and molecular systems. Our simulations confirm the generation of HHG with x-ray SHG (HHG-XSHG) from atomic core electrons through the rescattering of electrons from x-ray two-photon excitation and subsequent tunneling ionization in an optical laser field. The resulting HHG-XSHG spectrum features a broadband multi-peak structure and a distinct spectral cutoff in the x-ray regime. These findings indicate that HHG-XSHG is a valuable technique for probing core-electron dynamics, generating attosecond x-ray pulses, and exploring nonlinear interactions, effectively merging laser-driven attosecond technology with nonlinear x-ray methodologies provided by x-ray free-electron lasers.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.10211 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic of the HHG-XSHG process. The 1s core [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) Simulated harmonic spectra with different con [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Time-frequency analysis of HHG-XSHG with the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The dependence of the HHG-XSHG on the optical laser intensity (a), the x-ray intensity (b) and the x-ray photon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 71 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    P. B. Corkum and Ferenc Krausz. Attosecond science. Nature Physics, 3:381, 2007

    work page 2007

  2. [2]

    Attosecond science based on high harmonic gen- eration from gases and solids

    Jie Li, Jian Lu, Andrew Chew, Seunghwoi Han, Jialin Li, Yi Wu, He Wang, Shambhu Ghimire, and Zenghu Chang. Attosecond science based on high harmonic gen- eration from gases and solids. Nature Communications 2020 11:1, 11:1, 2020

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    Ultrafast high-harmonic spectroscopy of solids

    Christian Heide, Yuki Kobayashi, Sheikh Rubaiat Ul Haque, and Shambhu Ghimire. Ultrafast high-harmonic spectroscopy of solids. Nature Physics 2024 20:10 , 20:1546, 2024

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    A compact and cost-effective hard X-ray free- electron laser driven by a high-brightness and low-energy electron beam

    Eduard Prat, Rafael Abela, Masamitsu Aiba, Arturo Alarcon, J¨ urgen Alex, Yunieski Arbelo, Christopher Ar- rell, Vladimir Arsov, Camila Bacellar, Carl Beard, and et al. A compact and cost-effective hard X-ray free- electron laser driven by a high-brightness and low-energy electron beam. Nature Photonics 2020 14:12, 14:748, 2020. 7

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    A. F. Habib, G. G. Manahan, P. Scherkl, T. Heinemann, A. Sutherland, R. Altuiri, B. M. Alotaibi, M. Litos, J. Cary, T. Raubenheimer, E. Hemsing, M. J. Hogan, J. B. Rosenzweig, P. H. Williams, B. W.J. McNeil, and B. Hidding. Attosecond-Angstrom free-electron-laser to- wards the cold beam limit. Nature Communications 2023 14:1, 14:1, 2023

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Mcneil and Neil R

    Brian W.J. Mcneil and Neil R. Thompson. X-ray free- electron lasers. Nature Photonics 2010 4:12, 4:814, 2010

    work page 2010

  7. [7]

    Cavalieri, Paolo Craievich, Andreas Dax, and et al

    Eduard Prat, Andre Al Haddad, Christopher Arrell, Sven Augustin, Marco Boll, Christoph Bostedt, Marco Calvi, Adrian L. Cavalieri, Paolo Craievich, Andreas Dax, and et al. An X-ray free-electron laser with a highly con- figurable undulator and integrated chicanes for tailored pulse properties. Nature Communications 2023 14:1, 14:1, 2023

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Egor Sobolev, Sergei Zolotarev, Klaus Giewekemeyer, Jo- han Bielecki, Kenta Okamoto, Hemanth K. N. Reddy, Jakob Andreasson, Kartik Ayyer, Imrich Barak, Sa- dia Bari, Anton Barty, and et al. Megahertz single- particle imaging at the European XFEL. Communica- tions Physics, 3:97, 2020

    work page 2020

Show all 71 references
  1. [9]

    Shwartz, M

    S. Shwartz, M. Fuchs, J. B. Hastings, Y. Inubushi, T. Ishikawa, T. Katayama, D. A. Reis, T. Sato, K. Tono, M. Yabashi, S. Yudovich, and S. E. Harris. X-Ray Second Harmonic Generation. Physical Review Letters, 112:163901, 2014

    2014

  2. [10]

    R. K. Lam, S. L. Raj, T. A. Pascal, C. D. Pemmaraju, L. Foglia, A. Simoncig, N. Fabris, P. Miotti, C. J. Hull, A. M. Rizzuto, J. W. Smith, R. Mincigrucci, C. Mas- ciovecchio, A. Gessini, E. Allaria, G. De Ninno, B. Divi- acco, E. Roussel, S. Spampinati, G. Penco, S. Di Mitri, ...

    2018

  3. [11]

    Robert W. Boyd. Nonlinear Optics. Elsevier, 2003

    2003

  4. [12]

    K. B. Eisenthal. Liquid interfaces probed by second- harmonic and sum-frequency spectroscopy. Chemical Re- views, 96:1343, 1996

    1996

  5. [13]

    T. F. Heinz, C. K. Chen, D. Ricard, and Y. R. Shen. Spectroscopy of Molecular Monolayers by Reso- nant Second-Harmonic Generation. Physical Review Let- ters, 48:478, 1982

    1982

  6. [14]

    Second harmonic generation spectroscopy on two-dimensional materials [Invited]

    Yuan Wang, Sui Yang, Xiang Zhang, Ying Wang, and Jun Xiao. Second harmonic generation spectroscopy on two-dimensional materials [Invited]. Optical Materials Express, Vol. 9, Issue 3, pp. 1136-1149, 9:1136, 2019

    2019

  7. [15]

    Corn and Daniel A

    Robert M. Corn and Daniel A. Higgins. Optical Second Harmonic Generation as a Probe of Surface Chemistry. Chemical Reviews, 94:107, 1994

    1994

  8. [16]

    Campagnola, Andrew C

    Paul J. Campagnola, Andrew C. Millard, Mark Terasaki, Pamela E. Hoppe, Christian J. Malone, and William A. Mohler. Three-dimensional high-resolution second- harmonic generation imaging of endogenous structural proteins in biological tissues. Biophysical Journal, 82:493, 2002

    2002

  9. [17]

    Pavlov, and Roman V

    Manfred Fiebig, Victor V. Pavlov, and Roman V. Pis- arev. Second-harmonic generation as a tool for studying electronic and magnetic structures of crystals: review. J. Opt. Soc. Am. B, 22(1):96–118, Jan 2005

    2005

  10. [18]

    Magnetization- induced-second-harmonic generation from surfaces and interfaces

    Andrei Kirilyuk and Theo Rasing. Magnetization- induced-second-harmonic generation from surfaces and interfaces. J. Opt. Soc. Am. B, 22(1):148–167, Jan 2005

    2005

  11. [19]

    Semi- classical approximation for second-harmonic generation in nanoparticles

    Y Pavlyukh, J Berakdar, and W H¨ ubner. Semi- classical approximation for second-harmonic generation in nanoparticles. New Journal of Physics, 14(9):093044, 2012

    2012

  12. [20]

    Second-harmonic optical response from first principles

    S Sharma and C Ambrosch-Draxl. Second-harmonic optical response from first principles. Physica Scripta, 2004(T109):128, 2004

    2004

  13. [21]

    H¨ ubner

    Torsten Andersen and W. H¨ ubner. Substrate effects in the magneto-optical second-harmonic generation from first principles: Fe/cu(001). Phys. Rev. B, 65:174409, 2002

    2002

  14. [22]

    Schroder, W

    T. Schroder, W. Rudolph, S. V. Govorkov, and I. L. Shu- may. Time-resolved second-harmonic study of femtosec- ond laser-induced disordering of GaAs surfaces. Optics Letters, Vol. 16, Issue 13, pp. 1013-1015, 16:1013, 1991

    1991

  15. [23]

    Tyson, David A

    Alexandra L. Tyson, David A. Woods, and Jan R.R. Verlet. Time-resolved second harmonic generation with single-shot phase sensitivity. Journal of Chemical Physics, 149:204201, 2018

    2018

  16. [24]

    Hohlfeld, D

    J. Hohlfeld, D. Grosenick, U. Conrad, and E. Matthias. Femtosecond time-resolved reflection second-harmonic generation on polycrystalline copper. Applied Physics A Materials Science and Processing, 60:137, 1995

    1995

  17. [25]

    Y. M. Chang, L. Xu, and H. W.K. Tom. Observation of Coherent Surface Optical Phonon Oscillations by Time- Resolved Surface Second-Harmonic Generation. Physical Review Letters, 78:4649, 1997

    1997

  18. [26]

    Benderskii, and Ken- neth B

    Xiaoming Shang, Alexander V. Benderskii, and Ken- neth B. Eisenthal. Ultrafast solvation dynamics at sil- ica/liquid interfaces probed by time-resolved second har- monic generation. Journal of Physical Chemistry B , 105:11578, 2001

    2001

  19. [27]

    Aindrila Sinha, K. P. Mithun, and A. K. Sood. Time- Resolved Second-Harmonic Generation in Topological In- sulator Bi2Te3: Competing Contributions from Dirac Surface States, Surface Photovoltage, and Band Bend- ing. ACS Photonics, 10:3944, 2023

    2023

  20. [28]

    T. E. Glover, D. M. Fritz, M. Cammarata, T. K. Allison, Sinisa Coh, J. M. Feldkamp, H. Lemke, D. Zhu, Y. Feng, R. N. Coffee, M. Fuchs, S. Ghimire, J. Chen, S. Shwartz, D. A. Reis, S. E. Harris, and J. B. Hastings. X-ray and optical wave mixing. Nature, 488:603, 2012

    2012

  21. [29]

    Zhu and et al

    D. Zhu and et al. X-ray second harmonic generation as an interfacial probe. Nature Physics, 17:1140, 2021

    2021

  22. [30]

    Cathal ´O Broin and L. A.A. Nikolopoulos. A GPGPU based program to solve the TDSE in intense laser fields through the finite difference approach. Computer Physics Communications, 185:1791, 2014

    2014

  23. [31]

    Qpc-tdse: A parallel tdse solver for atoms and small molecules in strong lasers

    Zhao Han Zhang, Yang Li, Yi Jia Mao, and Feng He. Qpc-tdse: A parallel tdse solver for atoms and small molecules in strong lasers. Computer Physics Commu- nications, 290:108787, 2023

    2023

  24. [32]

    Qprop: A schr¨ odinger- solver for intense laser-atom interaction

    Dieter Bauer and Peter Koval. Qprop: A schr¨ odinger- solver for intense laser-atom interaction. Computer Physics Communications, 174:396, 2006

    2006

  25. [33]

    Schneider

    Ryan Schneider, Heman Gharibnejad, and Barry I. Schneider. Itvolt: An iterative solver for the time- dependent schr¨ odinger equation. Computer Physics Communications, 291:108780, 2023

    2023

  26. [34]

    Time and momentum distributions of 8 rescattering electrons

    Xinhua Xie, Gerald Jordan, Marlene Wickenhauser, and Armin scrinzi. Time and momentum distributions of 8 rescattering electrons. Journal of Modern Optics, 54:999, 2007

    2007

  27. [35]

    Wickenhauser, W

    Xinhua Xie, M. Wickenhauser, W. Boutu, H. Merdji, P. Sali` eres, and A. Scrinzi. Subcycle dynamics in the laser ionization of molecules. Phys. Rev. A, 76:023426, 2007

    2007

  28. [36]

    Two-Dimensional Attosecond Electron Wave-Packet Interferometry

    Xinhua Xie. Two-Dimensional Attosecond Electron Wave-Packet Interferometry. Physical Review Letters, 114:173003, 2015

    2015

  29. [37]

    Real-time probing of the electron dynamics of an atom in a strong infrared laser field

    Yunpei Deng and Xinhua Xie. Real-time probing of the electron dynamics of an atom in a strong infrared laser field. Physical Review A, 91:043414, 2015

    2015

  30. [38]

    Attosecond x-ray probing of laser-induced electron rescattering in atoms

    Li Zhang and Xinhua Xie. Attosecond x-ray probing of laser-induced electron rescattering in atoms. Physical Re- view Research, 2:033339, 2020

    2020

  31. [39]

    Coreno, L

    M. Coreno, L. Avaldi, R. Camilloni, K. C. Prince, M. de Simone, J. Karvonen, R. Colle, and S. Simonucci. Measurement and ab initio calculation of the ne photoab- sorption spectrum in the region of the k edge. Phys. Rev. A, 59:2494–2497, 1999

    1999

  32. [40]

    D. C. Haynes, M. Wurzer, A. Schletter, A. Al-Haddad, C. Blaga, C. Bostedt, J. Bozek, H. Bromberger, M. Bucher, A. Camper, S. Carron, R. Coffee, J. T. Costello, L. F. DiMauro, Y. Ding, K. Ferguson, I. Gr- guraˇ s, W. Helml, M. C. Hoffmann, M. Ilchen, S. Jalas, N. M. Kabachnik, ...

    2021

  33. [41]

    Schlatholter, R

    T. Schlatholter, R. Hoekstra, and R. Morgenstern. Life- times of the 1s hole state in neon-like ions. Physical Re- view A, 60:3849, 1999

    1999

  34. [42]

    High-order harmonic generation with resonant core excitation by ultraintense X-rays

    Christian Buth. High-order harmonic generation with resonant core excitation by ultraintense X-rays. The Eu- ropean Physical Journal D, 69:234, 2015

    2015

  35. [43]

    X. F. Li, A. Lhuillier, M. Ferray, L. A. Lompr´ e, and G. Mainfray. Multiple-harmonic generation in rare gases at high laser intensity. Physical Review A, 39:5751, 1989

    1989

  36. [44]

    P. B. Corkum. Plasma perspective on strong field mul- tiphoton ionization. Physical Review Letters, 71:1994, 1993

    1994

  37. [45]

    Lewenstein, Ph

    M. Lewenstein, Ph. Balcou, M. Ivanov, Anne L’Huillier, and P. Corkum. Theory of high-harmonic generation by low-frequency laser fields. Physical Review A, 49:2117, 1994

    1994

  38. [46]

    Correspondence of below-threshold high- order-harmonic generation and frustrated tunneling ion- ization

    Wei-Hao Xiong, Xiang-Ru Xiao, Liang-You Peng, and Qihuang Gong. Correspondence of below-threshold high- order-harmonic generation and frustrated tunneling ion- ization. Physical Review A, 94:013417, 2016

    2016

  39. [47]

    Mechanisms of below- threshold harmonic generation in atoms

    Wei Hao Xiong, Ji Wei Geng, Jing Yi Tang, Liang You Peng, and Qihuang Gong. Mechanisms of below- threshold harmonic generation in atoms. Physical Review Letters, 112:233001, 2014

    2014

  40. [48]

    Recent progress of below-threshold harmonic generation

    Wei Hao Xiong, Liang You Peng, and Qihuang Gong. Recent progress of below-threshold harmonic generation. Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, 50:032001, 2017

    2017

  41. [49]

    Handbook of X-ray data

    G¨ unter Zschornack. Handbook of X-ray data. Handbook of X-Ray Data, page 1, 2007

    2007

  42. [50]

    Chetty, R

    D. Chetty, R. D. Glover, B. A. DeHarak, X. M. Tong, H. Xu, T. Pauly, N. Smith, K. R. Hamilton, K. Bartschat, J. P. Ziegel, N. Douguet, A. N. Luiten, P. S. Light, I. V. Litvinyuk, and R. T. Sang. Observation of dynamic Stark resonances in strong-field excitation. Physical Revie...

    2020

  43. [51]

    Keitel, and Christian Buth

    G´ abor Darvasi, Christoph H. Keitel, and Christian Buth. Optical control of an atomic inner-shell x-ray laser.Phys- ical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, 89:013823, 2014

    2014

  44. [52]

    Varma, Lin Pan, Donald R

    Hari R. Varma, Lin Pan, Donald R. Beck, and Robin Santra. X-ray-absorption near-edge structure of laser- dressed neon. Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, 78:065401, 2008

    2008

  45. [53]

    Phase matching of high harmonic generation in the soft and hard X-ray regions of the spectrum

    Tenio Popmintchev, Ming-Chang Chen, Alon Bahabad, Michael Gerrity, Pavel Sidorenko, Oren Cohen, Ivan P Christov, Margaret M Murnane, and Henry C Kapteyn. Phase matching of high harmonic generation in the soft and hard X-ray regions of the spectrum. Proceedings of the National ...

    2009

  46. [54]

    Multiple core-hole coherence in x- ray four-wave-mixing spectroscopies

    Shaul Mukamel. Multiple core-hole coherence in x- ray four-wave-mixing spectroscopies. Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics, 72:235110, 2005

    2005

  47. [55]

    Rouxel, Ahmadreza Rajabi, and Shaul Mukamel

    J´ er´ emy R. Rouxel, Ahmadreza Rajabi, and Shaul Mukamel. Chiral Four-Wave Mixing Signals with Circu- larly Polarized X-ray Pulses. Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation, 16:5784, 2020

    2020

  48. [56]

    Coherent all X-ray four wave mixing at core shell resonances

    Ana Sofia Morillo-Candas, Sven Martin Augustin, Ed- uard Prat, Antoine Sarracini, Jonas Knurr, Serhane Zer- dane, Zhibin Sun, Ningchen Yang, Marc Rebholz, Hankai Zhang, and et al. Coherent all X-ray four wave mixing at core shell resonances. arXiv:2408.11881, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  49. [57]

    William K. Peters, Jacob Feltman, Jacob Feltman, Travis Jones, Travis Jones, Sanghoon Song, Matthieu Chol- let, Joseph Robinson, Prashant Padmanabhan, Laura Foglia, Filippo Bencivenga, Ryan Coffee, Ryan Coffee, and Pamela Bowlan. Hard x-ray-optical four-wave mix- ing using a s...

    2023

  50. [58]

    J´ er´ emy R. Rouxel, Danny Fainozzi, Roman Mankowsky, Benedikt R¨ osner, Gediminas Seniutinas, Riccardo Min- cigrucci, Sara Catalini, Laura Foglia, Riccardo Cucini, Florian D¨ oring, Adam Kubec, Frieder Koch, Filippo Bencivenga, and et al. Hard X-ray transient grating spectro...

    2021

  51. [59]

    Nogueira, Jacob P

    Oliver Alexander, Felix Egun, Laura Rego, Ana Mar- tinez Gutierrez, Douglas Garratt, Gustavo Adolfo Car- denes, Juan J. Nogueira, Jacob P. Lee, Kaixiang Zhao, Ru-Pan Wang, David Ayuso, Jonathan C. T. Barnard, Sandra Beauvarlet, Philip H. Bucksbaum, David Ce- sar, Ryan Coffee, ...

    2024

  52. [60]

    High harmonic generation 9 in mixed XUV and NIR fields at a free-electron laser

    Jan Troß, Shashank Pathak, Adam Summers, Dimitrios Rompotis, Benjamin Erk, Christopher Passow, Bastian Manschwetus, Rebecca Boll, Patrik Grychtol, Sadia Bari, Vinod Kumarappan, Anh Thu Le, Cheng Jin, Carlos Trallero, and Daniel Rolles. High harmonic generation 9 in mixed XUV a...

    2022

  53. [61]

    T. S. Sarantseva, M. V. Frolov, N. L. Manakov, A. A. Silaev, N. V. Vvedenskii, and Anthony F. Starace. XUV-assisted high-order-harmonic-generation spectroscopy. Physical Review A, 98:063433, 2018

    2018

  54. [62]

    Gaarde, Kenneth J

    Mette B. Gaarde, Kenneth J. Schafer, Arne Heinrich, Jens Biegert, and Ursula Keller. Large enhancement of macroscopic yield in attosecond pulse train assisted har- monic generation. Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecu- lar, and Optical Physics, 72:013411, 2005

    2005

  55. [63]

    Kohler, Christoph H

    Christian Buth, Markus C. Kohler, Christoph H. Keitel, and Joachim Ullrich. High-order harmonic generation enhanced by XUV light. Optics Letters, Vol. 36, Issue 17, pp. 3530-3532, 36:3530, 2011

    2011

  56. [64]

    Tudorovskaya and M

    M. Tudorovskaya and M. Lein. High-harmonic generation with combined infrared and extreme ultraviolet fields. Journal of Modern Optics, 61:845, 2014

    2014

  57. [65]

    Keitel, and Karen Z

    Christian Buth, Feng He, Joachim Ullrich, Christoph H. Keitel, and Karen Z. Hatsagortsyan. Attosecond pulses at kiloelectronvolt photon energies from high-order- harmonic generation with core electrons. Physical Review A, 88:033848, 2013

    2013

  58. [66]

    Schrauth, Alexander Gaeta, Carlos Hern´ andez-Garc ´ ıa, Luis Plaja, Andreas Becker, Agnieszka Jaron-Becker, Margaret M

    Tenio Popmintchev, Ming-Chang Chen, Dimitar Pop- mintchev, Paul Arpin, Susannah Brown, Skirman- tas Aliˇ sauskas, Giedrius Andriukaitis, Tadas Balˇ ciunas, Oliver D M¨ ucke, Audrius Pugzlys, Andrius Baltuˇ ska, Bonggu Shim, Samuel E. Schrauth, Alexander Gaeta, Carlos Hern´ and...

    2012

  59. [67]

    Single-active electron calculations of high- order harmonic generation from valence shells in atoms for quantitative comparison with TDDFT calculations

    Jie Liu, Wei Hu, Jinlong Yang -, Zhongxue Ren, Yan Yang, Yalei Zhu, al, R Reiff, T Joyce, A Jaro´ n-Becker, and A Becker. Single-active electron calculations of high- order harmonic generation from valence shells in atoms for quantitative comparison with TDDFT calculations. Jo...

    2020

  60. [68]

    Application of a numerical- basis-state method to strong-field excitation and ioniza- tion of hydrogen atoms

    Shaohao Chen, Xiang Gao, Jiaming Li, Andreas Becker, and Agnieszka Jaro´ n-Becker. Application of a numerical- basis-state method to strong-field excitation and ioniza- tion of hydrogen atoms. Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, 86:013410, 2012

    2012

  61. [69]

    Bonaf´ e, Esra Ilke Albar, Sebastian T

    Franco P. Bonaf´ e, Esra Ilke Albar, Sebastian T. Ohlmann, Valeriia P. Kosheleva, Carlos M. Bustamante, Francesco Troisi, Angel Rubio, and Heiko Appel. Full minimal coupling Maxwell-TDDFT: an ab initio frame- work for light-matter phenomena beyond the dipole ap- proximation. P...

    2024

  62. [70]

    Theoretical Insights into Ul- trafast Dynamics in Quantum Materials

    Mengxue Guan, Daqiang Chen, Shiqi Hu, Hui Zhao, Pei- wei You, and Sheng Meng. Theoretical Insights into Ul- trafast Dynamics in Quantum Materials. Ultrafast Sci- ence, 2022, 2022

    2022

  63. [71]

    Rui Jin, Adam Fouda, Alexander Magunia, Yeonsig Nam, Marc Rebholz, Alberto De Fanis, Kai Li, Gilles Doumy, Thomas M. Baumann, Michael Straub, Sergey Usenko, Yevheniy Ovcharenko, Tommaso Mazza, Jacobo Monta˜ no, Marcus Ag ˚ aker, Maria Novella Piancastelli, Marc Simon, Jan-Erik...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.