Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 7 minor 4 cited by

Theory of quantum optics and optical coherence in high harmonic generation

T0 review · 4 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper predicts that high-harmonic photons from a single atom arrive anti-bunched, violating the classical lower bound on $g^{(2)}(0)$.

desk verdict Clean Heisenberg-picture framework for HHG correlation functions with a genuinely new anti-bunching prediction that currently rests on the semiclassical dipole approximation, which is exactly the part that needs scrutiny before the number is trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.13287 v1 pith:UFMUDU4E submitted 2025-04-17 quant-ph physics.atom-phphysics.optics

Philipp Stammer , Javier Rivera-Dean , Maciej Lewenstein This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phphysics.atom-phphysics.optics MSC 81V8081V45 PACS 42.50.Ar42.65.Ky32.80.Rm
keywords highharmonicgenerationopticalcoherencephotonantibunchingintensitycorrelationHeisenbergpicturestrong-fieldquantumopticsdipolemomentfluctuationssemiclassicalapproximation
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 builds a quantum-optical, Heisenberg-picture theory of the light emitted in high harmonic generation (HHG), treating the harmonic field as quantized while the electron is driven by the classical laser. It uses the theory to compute first- and second-order field correlations and claims that a single emitting atom produces harmonic light with photon anti-bunching: $g^{(2)}_{11}(0)\approx 5\times 10^{-3}$ and $g^{(2)}_{13}(0)\approx 3\times 10^{-3}$, far below the classical bound $g^{(2)}(0)\ge 1$. It also explains why decades of semiclassical HHG spectra worked: with $N$ atoms the coherent contribution scales as $N^{2}$ while the incoherent, quantum part scales as $N$, so in ordinary gas targets the classical coherent emission dominates. The results locate the non-classical signatures of HHG in measurable intensity correlations and point to single-emitter or correlated-material settings where they could be observed.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Heisenberg-picture annihilation operator for a harmonic mode, $a_{q}(t)=a_{q}e^{-i\omega_{q}t}+g\sqrt{q}\int_{t_{0}}^{t}dt' e^{-i\omega_{q}(t-t')}\epsilon_{q}\cdot d(t')$, which turns every field correlation into a multi-time correlation of the atomic dipole. The dipole is evolved with the semiclassical Hamiltonian $H_{sc}(t)=H_{S}-\sum_{i} d_{i}\cdot E_{cl}(t)$, so the intense laser's classical field drives the electron while the harmonic field is treated quantum mechanically. The argument hinges on separating dipole correlations into mean and fluctuation parts: coherent emission comes from $\langle d(t)\rangle$, incoherent emission from $\langle \Delta d(t_{1})\Delta d(t_{2})\rangle$, and the second-order correlation from a four-time dipole correlation decomposed analogously. Counting powers of $N$ in those correlations produces the quantum-to-classical transition.

What would settle it

Measure the zero-delay intensity correlation of one harmonic order from a single isolated emitter; observing $g^{(2)}(0)\ge 1$ would falsify the anti-bunching claim. A cheaper computational test is to include quantized-field backaction in the dipole equation of motion for a single-mode model and recompute $g^{(2)}(0)$; if it rises above 1, the semiclassical-dipole approximation is the cause.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes a Heisenberg-picture quantum optical theory of high harmonic generation and uses it to compute the first non-classical photon statistics predicted for HHG. For a single emitter, the normalized zero-delay intensity correlation of the 11th and 13th harmonics is $g^{(2)}_{11}(0)\approx 5\times 10^{-3}$ and $g^{(2)}_{13}(0)\approx 3\times 10^{-3}$, both below the classical lower bound $g^{(2)}(0)\ge 1$, meaning the emitted harmonic photons tend to avoid arriving together. The same calculation decomposes the first-order correlation into a coherent part, given by the usual semiclassical dipole expectation value, and an incoherent part, given by two-time dipole fluctuations; with $N$ uncorrelated atoms these scale as $N^{2}$ and $N$, respectively, which is why ordinary many-atom HHG spectra look classical while single-emitter correlations do not. The paper also shows the harmonic field has first-order coherence, $|g^{(1)}(\tau)|=1$.

Load-bearing premise

The anti-bunching prediction rests on evolving the electron's dipole with the classical laser field only, omitting the backaction of the quantized harmonic field on the electron; if that backaction alters the dipole fluctuations, the predicted correlation values could change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single emitting atom yields harmonic light with $g^{(2)}_{11}(0)\approx5\times10^{-3}$ and $g^{(2)}_{13}(0)\approx3\times10^{-3}$, so harmonic photons from one emitter are strongly anti-bunched and nearly single-photon-like.
  • The familiar plateau-and-cutoff HHG spectrum is the coherent contribution; in a single emitter the incoherent, fluctuation-driven contribution is several orders of magnitude larger and shows no harmonic peaks.
  • With $N$ uncorrelated atoms, coherent emission grows as $N^{2}$ and incoherent as $N$ (for the intensity correlations, coherent $N^{4}$ vs incoherent $O(N^{3})$), so in macroscopic gas targets the classical part masks the quantum correlations.
  • The harmonic field satisfies first-order coherence, $|g^{(1)}(\tau)|=1$, so it exhibits Young-type interference even though its photon statistics are non-classical.
  • Because the derivation does not depend on the medium, the same correlation-function theory applies to molecules, solids, and correlated systems, where the many-emitter scaling can differ.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the single-emitter prediction survives isolation, HHG could serve as a wavelength-tunable anti-bunched source in the extreme ultraviolet, since each plateau harmonic carries its own near-zero $g^{(2)}(0)$.
  • The semiclassical-dipole step is the prime suspect for quantitative error: a fully quantized one-mode model with field backaction would show whether the predicted $g^{(2)}(0)$ values are stable.
  • In correlated or solid-state targets the factorization that produces the $N^{4}$ coherent term breaks down, so non-classical correlations may persist at high density; the paper's framework is ready-made to test that.
  • The broad, peakless incoherent spectrum suggests that frequency filtering selects the classical coherent component; coincidence gating on the undispersed harmonic field could expose the quantum fluctuations.
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

4 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper develops a Heisenberg-picture quantum optical theory of field correlations for high harmonic generation (HHG). The authors derive expressions for the first- and second-order field correlation functions of the harmonic modes in terms of dipole-moment correlations of the emitting medium, using the semiclassical Hamiltonian H_sc(t) = H_S - d·E_cl(t) to propagate the dipole operators. They decompose the first-order correlation (and thus the HHG spectrum) into coherent and incoherent contributions, showing that the coherent part reproduces the standard semiclassical result while the incoherent part, arising from dipole fluctuations, can dominate for a single emitter. For many uncorrelated emitters, the coherent contribution scales as N^2 (or N^4 for the second-order correlation) and the incoherent part as N (or N^3), which they argue explains the historical success of semiclassical HHG descriptions. The central new claim is the prediction of photon anti-bunching in HHG: for a single emitter, the normalized intensity correlation at zero delay is g(2)(0) ≈ 5×10^-3 for harmonic 11 and ≈ 3×10^-3 for harmonic 13 (Sec. IV A, Fig. 4). The authors also present a many-atom analysis in which g(2)(τ) approaches 1 as the number of emitters increases.

Significance. If correct, the prediction of anti-bunching would be the first theoretical demonstration of non-classical photon statistics intrinsic to HHG, opening a new direction at the intersection of strong-field physics and quantum optics. The paper also provides a clean explanation of the success of semiclassical HHG theory through the N-scaling of coherent versus incoherent contributions, and its Heisenberg framework is general and extendable to other intense-laser-driven systems. The analytic derivations are internally consistent and the basic structure (decomposition into coherent/incoherent parts, scaling with N) is both elegant and likely robust. However, the headline quantitative predictions rely on the semiclassical dipole approximation for the fluctuation correlations, and the manuscript does not provide independent verification, error bars, or convergence tests for g(2)(0). These limitations currently temper the significance of the central claim.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. II (Eq. 13), Sec. IV A (Eqs. 72-74, Fig. 4)] The anti-bunching prediction g(2)(0) ≈ 5×10^-3 is computed using dipole operators evolved with the semiclassical Hamiltonian H_sc(t) of Eq. (13), which omits the quantized-field interaction H_I of Eq. (3) from the dipole equation of motion (Eq. 12). The paper justifies this by the intensity of the classical driving field, which is adequate for the mean dipole but not automatically for the four-point dipole correlation D(t1,t2,t3,t4) in Eq. (74). In resonance fluorescence, the vacuum coupling is precisely what determines the dipole fluctuation correlations that yield g(2)(0) = 0, and the same backaction could modify the near-cancellation that produces the very small g(2)(0) values reported here. Because these values are only 3-5×10^-3 above zero, even a modest correction to the correlated part could restore g(2)(0) ≥ 1. Please provide a quantitative estimate of the neglected backaction on the dipole fluctuation correlation, for example a perturbative calculation in the coupling g for the four-point function, or otherwise delimit the parameter regime where the approximation is under control for this specific observable.
  2. [Sec. III D, Fig. 3] The claim that the single-atom incoherent spectrum is 'a few orders of magnitude higher' than the coherent part and that the total spectrum 'exhibits no peaks' is a strong quantitative result that underlies the many-atom scaling argument of Sec. III E. This result is computed from SFA-type matrix elements (SM Eq. B3) and is not compared against any independent calculation, such as a numerical solution of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation for the two-time dipole correlation ⟨Δd(t1)Δd(t2)⟩ at the same parameters. Given that standard strong-field approximations yield peaked single-atom HHG spectra for the mean dipole, the dominance of the peakless incoherent contribution is a non-trivial claim. Please provide a convergence analysis for the incoherent-spectrum magnitude (analogous to the coherent-spectrum checks in SM Fig. 7) and, if possible, a benchmark against TDSE for the relevant dipole correlation functions.
  3. [Sec. II (paragraph 4), Sec. V A] The statement that the Heisenberg approach does not rely on 'approximate solutions of the Schrödinger equation' and does not depend on 'specific assumptions underlying the strong field driven dynamics' is overstated. The analytic framework in Eqs. (8)-(9) is indeed general, but every numerical prediction in Secs. III and IV is obtained using the semiclassical propagator U_sc(t) of Eq. (15), i.e., the Lewenstein-type strong-field approximation for the dipole moments. This distinction should be made explicit in the text, since the claimed independence from Schrödinger approximations applies only to the formal derivation, not to the computed spectra or g(2) values.
  4. [Sec. IV A, Eq. (77) and SM C] The headline quantity g(2)(0) is reported without any convergence checks or numerical uncertainties. The SM reports convergence of the coherent spectrum with respect to momentum-grid size and cutoff (SM Fig. 7), but no analogous tests are shown for the second-order correlation function, which involves multiple nested integrals, continuum-continuum matrix elements, and derivative terms (SM Eqs. C14-C30). Because g(2)(0) ≈ 5×10^-3 is close to zero, numerical artifacts could easily change the sign or magnitude of the result. Please provide the dependence of g(2)(0) on the numerical parameters (N_els, p_lim, N_FFT, number of optical cycles, and the momentum-grid spacing) and state the resulting numerical uncertainty.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Sec. IV A, last paragraph] The phrase 'this is the first observation of non-classical photon correlations in the process of HHG' should read 'first theoretical prediction', since the paper reports no experimental measurement.
  2. [Fig. 5 caption] The caption lists log10 N ∈ {1.0, 2.7, 3.4, 4.1, 4.8, 5.5, 6.7, 7.0} while the text specifies log10 N ∈ {2.0, 2.7, 3.4, 4.1, 4.8, 5.5, 6.7, 7.0}. Please make these consistent.
  3. [Sec. III B] The result |g(1)(τ)| = 1 for the normalized first-order correlation follows from restricting to a single spectral mode in the quasi-stationary limit, and is therefore a property of the narrow-band mode filter rather than of the HHG process itself. The text overstates this as a property of 'HHG possesses first order optical coherence'; please temper the claim or add a clarifying remark.
  4. [SM C.1, after Eq. (C7)] The sentence 'we focus on Eqs. (C8) and (C9) of the main text' is misleading: Eqs. (C8) and (C9) are in the Supplementary Material, not the main text. Please correct the reference.
  5. [SM D, Eqs. (D1)-(D4)] In the list of partitions in Eq. (D2)-(D4), the term ⟨d(t2)⟩⟨d(t3)⟩⟨d(t2)d(t4)⟩ appears to be a typo; it should likely be ⟨d(t1)⟩⟨d(t3)⟩⟨d(t2)d(t4)⟩ to enumerate all independent pairings. Please check the expression.
  6. [General] There are several typographical errors, e.g., 'perspetive' in the Acknowledgments and 'programe' for 'programme'. A careful proofread is recommended.
  7. [Sec. III D, Eq. (46)] The resolution of identity in Eq. (46) neglects bound excited states. This approximation is stated, but a brief justification of its validity for the harmonic orders considered (where the continuum dominates the strong-field dynamics) would improve the presentation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the correlation functions and anti-bunching values are numerical outputs of a self-contained semiclassical-dipole model, not inputs or renamed fits.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained in the relevant sense. The Heisenberg field solution (Eq. 9) expresses a_q(t) in terms of the dipole operator; the dipole is evolved with the stated semiclassical Hamiltonian H_sc(t) (Eq. 13), and the first- and second-order correlation functions are then computed by inserting this solution and numerically integrating the resulting dipole correlation functions (Eqs. 27 and 72-74). The anti-bunching values g^(2)_11(0) about 5e-3 and g^(2)_13(0) about 3e-3 are outputs of those integrals, not imposed by any fitted parameter or by the definition of g^(2). The coherent part of the spectrum reproduces the standard semiclassical HHG result because the model intentionally uses the semiclassical dipole, but that is an input assumption, not a circular reduction. Citations to the authors' earlier work (Refs. 34-37) provide context, comparison, and standard SFA matrix elements; the borrowed SFA expression is a standard physical approximation rather than a self-citation that defines the target result. The acknowledged neglect of quantized-field backaction in the dipole EOM is a limitation in validity, not a circularity: it does not make the prediction equal to its input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new entities and fits no free parameters. Its central claims rest on standard QED in the dipole approximation plus a chain of standard HHG approximations. The most consequential is the semiclassical dipole evolution (item 2), which the paper itself flags as an approximation in Sec. II; all anti-bunching and incoherent-spectrum numbers inherit this assumption.

assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Light-matter interaction in the dipole approximation and length gauge (Eq. 3).
    Standard for strong-field HHG; defines the coupling between the dipole operator and the quantized field, and is the starting point of the Heisenberg EOM.
  • domain assumption The dipole is driven only by the classical laser field; quantized-field backaction is neglected (Eq. 13).
    Necessary to obtain a tractable dipole; the paper notes exact dipole EOM is involved. A load-bearing approximation for all numerical results.
  • domain assumption Initial state is a coherent state for the driving mode, vacuum for harmonics, and the atomic ground state (Eq. 5).
    Standard initial condition for HHG experiments; used in all expectation values.
  • domain assumption Uncorrelated emitters with identical driving fields, so N-emitter dipole correlation functions factorize (Sec. III E).
    Justified for dilute gas targets; the N^2 vs N scaling depends on this.
  • domain assumption Quasi-stationary long-time limit and Wiener-Khintchine theorem for the spectrum (Sec. III A).
    Assumes emission is stationary enough that G(1) depends only on τ, and the filter is narrow; needed to map correlations to the spectral peaks.
  • domain assumption Bound excited states are neglected in the resolution of identity for the incoherent part (Eq. 46).
    The paper says this is normally valid in HHG; changes if a cavity or initial superposition is present.
  • domain assumption Hydrogenic 1s ground-state dipole matrix elements and SFA propagators in the numerics (SM Eq. A4).
    Standard Lewenstein-model ingredients; the quantitative values of g(2) and the incoherent spectrum depend on these matrix elements.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Theory of quantum optics and optical coherence in high harmonic generation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UFMUDU4E

@misc{pith2026250413287,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Theory of quantum optics and optical coherence in high harmonic generation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UFMUDU4E}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.13287}
}
read the original abstract

Optical coherence encodes information about the correlations of the electromagnetic field. In combination with quantum optical approaches, it allows for the study of the correlations between photons. Since the pioneering papers of Glauber, studies of optical coherence have facilitated many fundamental insights into non-classical signatures of light emission processes, with wide applicability in modern quantum technologies. However, when it comes to the photon up-conversion process of high-order harmonic generation the description has focused on semi-classical methods for decades. In this work, we overcome this limitation and establish a quantum optical theory of field correlations for the process of high harmonic generation (HHG). In effect, we introduce the notion of optical coherence at the intersection of quantum optics and strong laser-driven processes, and obtain the harmonic field correlation functions. In particular, we focus on the first and second order field correlation, which allow to understand the origin of the classical properties of the HHG spectrum, and its departure into the quantum regime. Further, we develop the theory for two-time intensity correlation functions of the harmonic field, and demonstrate the onset of anti-bunching signatures in HHG. We study the correlation functions in the regime of a single, few and many emitters in atomic HHG, showing the transition from quantum to classical signatures in the correlations. Since the theory is generic, it can be extended to multi-time correlation functions of any order, and allows to consider the interaction of light with arbitrary material systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.13287 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Here, we schematically show the experimental configurations studied in this work using the process of high harmonic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. In (a) we show the expectation value of the total scat [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Here we show in (a) the coherent spectrum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. We show the normalized second order correlation function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. We show the normalized intensity correlation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. In (a), the dipole computed with the steps mentioned in the text. The red region corresponds to the warm up part of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. In (a), the HHG spectrum has been computed for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Attosecond metrology of bright quantum light

    quant-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Attosecond streaking of bright squeezed light produces distinct sub-cycle modulations that encode quantum field quadrature fluctuations, enabling squeezing certification beyond conventional tomography limits.

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

    quant-ph 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A Heisenberg-picture perturbative expansion adds beyond-semiclassical emitter-dynamics corrections to HHG theory, predicting squeezing that grows with emitter number while g(2) approaches 1.

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

    quant-ph 2026-02 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    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.

  4. CVCM Track Circuits Pre-emptive Failure Diagnostics for Predictive Maintenance Using Deep Neural Networks

    cs.AI 2025-08 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    The paper asserts high-accuracy predictive maintenance for CVCM track circuits, but the supplied full text contains none of the supporting work.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

97 extracted references · 69 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [34]

    Gorlach, O

    A. Gorlach, O. Neufeld, N. Rivera, O. Cohen, and I. Kaminer, The quantum-optical nature of high har- monic generation, Nature communications 11, 4598 (2020)

    work page 2020

  2. [1]

    The role of the incoherent contribution In Sec. III D, we have seen that the incoherent contri- bution to the first order correlation function is the origin of non-classical signatures in the HHG spectrum (or the quantum state as shown in Ref. [36]). Since the inco- herent contribution is due to the dipole moment fluc- tuations, we expect that analyzing s...

  3. [2]

    This includes the detailed study of the precise measure- ment conditions and the corresponding spectra

    Study the correlation and coherence properties With the methods provided in this work, we can now study the coherence properties of the high harmonic radi- ation from a quantum optical perspective in more detail. This includes the detailed study of the precise measure- ment conditions and the corresponding spectra. Impor- tant aspects on that matter are t...

  4. [3]

    Generalization to arbitrary driving fields Recent studies have focused on inducing non-classical signatures in the harmonic radiation by using non- classical driving fields, such as squeezed states [33, 59, 65, 84] or photon number states [65, 66]. It was shown that a squeezed driving field can induce squeezing in the harmonic field modes [33], or that sq...

  5. [4]

    III and IV studied the first and second order correlation function in HHG, respectively, and considered the case of atomic gas targets

    Correlated materials The analysis in Sec. III and IV studied the first and second order correlation function in HHG, respectively, and considered the case of atomic gas targets. In the re- spective subsection III E and IV B the many atom case was discussed, where we have assumed uncorrelated emit- ters (which is usually the case for atomic gas targets). S...

    2020

  6. [5]

    R. J. Glauber, The quantum theory of optical coherence, Physical Review 130, 2529 (1963)

    1963

  7. [6]

    R. J. Glauber, Coherent and incoherent states of the ra- diation field, Physical Review 131, 2766 (1963)

    1963

  8. [7]

    R. J. Glauber, Photon correlations, Physical Review Let- ters 10, 84 (1963)

    1963

Show all 97 references
  1. [8]

    R. J. Glauber, Nobel lecture: One hundred years of light quanta, Reviews of Modern Physics 78, 1267 (2006)

    2006

  2. [9]

    Mandel and E

    L. Mandel and E. Wolf, Optical coherence and quantum optics (Cambridge university press, 1995)

    1995

  3. [10]

    H. J. Carmichael, Statistical methods in quantum op- tics 1: master equations and Fokker-Planck equations (Springer Science & Business Media, 2013)

    2013

  4. [11]

    Kimble and L

    H. Kimble and L. Mandel, Theory of resonance fluores- cence, Physical Review A 13, 2123 (1976)

    1976

  5. [12]

    Heitler, The quantum theory of radiation (Courier Corporation, 1984)

    W. Heitler, The quantum theory of radiation (Courier Corporation, 1984)

    1984

  6. [13]

    Lewenstein, P

    M. Lewenstein, P. Balcou, M. Y. Ivanov, A. L’huillier, and P. B. Corkum, Theory of high-harmonic generation by low-frequency laser fields, Physical Review A49, 2117 (1994)

    1994

  7. [14]

    Mollow, Power spectrum of light scattered by two-level systems, Physical Review 188 (1969)

    B. Mollow, Power spectrum of light scattered by two-level systems, Physical Review 188 (1969)

    1969

  8. [15]

    Cohen-Tannoudji and S

    C. Cohen-Tannoudji and S. Reynaud, Dressed-atom de- scription of resonance fluorescence and absorption spec- tra of a multi-level atom in an intense laser beam, Jour- nal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics 10, 345 (1977)

    1977

  9. [16]

    S. H. Autler and C. H. Townes, Stark effect in rapidly varying fields, Physical Review 100, 703 (1955)

    1955

  10. [17]

    M. O. Scully and M. S. Zubairy, Quantum optics (Cam- bridge university press, 1997)

    1997

  11. [18]

    R. H. Brown and R. Q. Twiss, Correlation between pho- tons in two coherent beams of light, Nature 177, 27 (1956)

    1956

  12. [19]

    H. J. Kimble, M. Dagenais, and L. Mandel, Photon anti- bunching in resonance fluorescence, Physical Review Let- ters 39, 691 (1977)

    1977

  13. [20]

    Brabec and F

    T. Brabec and F. Krausz, Intense few-cycle laser fields: Frontiers of nonlinear optics, Reviews of Modern Physics 72, 545 (2000)

    2000

  14. [21]

    Ferray, A

    M. Ferray, A. L’Huillier, X. Li, L. Lompre, G. Mainfray, and C. Manus, Multiple-harmonic conversion of 1064 nm 18 radiation in rare gases, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 21, L31 (1988)

    1988

  15. [22]

    L’Huillier and P

    A. L’Huillier and P. Balcou, High-order harmonic gener- ation in rare gases with a 1-ps 1053-nm laser, Physical Review Letters 70, 774 (1993)

    1993

  16. [23]

    P. B. Corkum, Plasma perspective on strong field mul- tiphoton ionization, Physical review letters 71, 1994 (1993)

    1993

  17. [24]

    Guo and T

    D.-S. Guo and T. Aberg, Quantum electrodynamical ap- proach to multiphoton ionisation in the high-intensity h field, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 21, 4577 (1988)

    1988

  18. [25]

    Xu, Non-perturbative theory of harmonic generation under a high-intensity laser field, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik D Atoms, Molecules and Clusters 28, 27 (1993)

    H. Xu, Non-perturbative theory of harmonic generation under a high-intensity laser field, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik D Atoms, Molecules and Clusters 28, 27 (1993)

    1993

  19. [26]

    Compagno, K

    G. Compagno, K. Dietz, and F. Persico, Qed theory of harmonic emission by a strongly driven atom, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 27, 4779 (1994)

    1994

  20. [27]

    Becker, A

    W. Becker, A. Lohr, M. Kleber, and M. Lewenstein, A unified theory of high-harmonic generation: Application to polarization properties of the harmonics, Physical Re- view A 56, 645 (1997)

    1997

  21. [28]

    Gauthey, C

    F. Gauthey, C. H. Keitel, P. L. Knight, and A. Maquet, Role of initial coherence in the generation of harmon- ics and sidebands from a strongly driven two-level atom, Physical Review A 52, 525 (1995)

    1995

  22. [29]

    J. H. Eberly, Q. Su, and J. Javanainen, High-order har- monic production in multiphoton ionization, JOSA B 6, 1289 (1989)

    1989

  23. [30]

    Eberly, Q

    J. Eberly, Q. Su, J. Javanainen, K. Kulander, B. Shore, and L. Roso-Franco, High-order harmonic generation during multiphoton ionization of gases, Journal of Mod- ern Optics 36, 829 (1989)

    1989

  24. [31]

    Eberly, Q

    J. Eberly, Q. Su, and J. Javanainen, Nonlinear light scat- tering accompanying multiphoton ionization, Physical re- view letters 62, 881 (1989)

    1989

  25. [32]

    Cruz-Rodriguez, D

    L. Cruz-Rodriguez, D. Dey, A. Freibert, and P. Stam- mer, Quantum phenomena in attosecond science, Nature Reviews Physics 6, 691 (2024)

    2024

  26. [33]

    Stammer, J

    P. Stammer, J. Rivera-Dean, T. Lamprou, E. Pisanty, M. F. Ciappina, P. Tzallas, and M. Lewenstein, High photon number entangled states and coherent state su- perposition from the extreme ultraviolet to the far in- frared, Physical Review Letters 128, 123603 (2022)

    2022

  27. [35]

    Pizzi, A

    A. Pizzi, A. Gorlach, N. Rivera, A. Nunnenkamp, and I. Kaminer, Light emission from strongly driven many- body systems, Nature Physics 19, 551 (2023)

    2023

  28. [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, Physical Review X 15, 011023 (2025)

    2025

  29. [37]

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

    2024

  30. [38]

    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 Physics 17, 1104 (2021)

    2021

  31. [39]

    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, Physical Review A 105, 033714 (2022)

    2022

  32. [40]

    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, Physical Review Letters 132, 143603 (2024)

    2024

  33. [41]

    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 Quantum 4, 010201 (2023)

    2023

  34. [42]

    C. S. Lange, T. Hansen, and L. B. Madsen, Electron- correlation-induced nonclassicality of light from high- order harmonic generation, Physical Review A 109, 033110 (2024)

    2024

  35. [43]

    Gonoskov, R

    I. Gonoskov, R. Sondenheimer, C. H¨ unecke, D. Kar- tashov, U. Peschel, and S. Gr¨ afe, Nonclassical light gener- ation and control from laser-driven semiconductor intra- band excitations, Physical Review B 109, 125110 (2024)

    2024

  36. [44]

    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, Physical Review B 109, 035203 (2024)

    2024

  37. [45]

    C. S. Lange, T. Hansen, and L. B. Madsen, Exci- tonic enhancement of squeezed light in quantum-optical high-harmonic generation from a mott insulator, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.15932 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Stammer, Theory of entanglement and measurement in high-order harmonic generation, Physical Review A 106, L050402 (2022)

    P. Stammer, Theory of entanglement and measurement in high-order harmonic generation, Physical Review A 106, L050402 (2022)

    2022

  39. [47]

    W´ odkiewicz and J

    K. W´ odkiewicz and J. Eberly, Markovian and non- markovian behavior in two-level atom fluorescence, An- nals of Physics 101, 574 (1976)

    1976

  40. [48]

    Ishkhanyan and V

    A. Ishkhanyan and V. Krainov, The markoff approxima- tion for high harmonic generation during laser–atom in- teraction, Laser Physics Letters 18, 046001 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    Sundaram and P

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

    1990

  42. [50]

    Diestler, Harmonic generation: quantum- electrodynamical theory of the harmonic photon-number spectrum, Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics 78, 033814 (2008)

    D. Diestler, Harmonic generation: quantum- electrodynamical theory of the harmonic photon-number spectrum, Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics 78, 033814 (2008)

    2008

  43. [51]

    M. D. Srinivas and E. B. Davies, Photon counting prob- abilities in quantum optics, Optica Acta: International Journal of Optics 28, 981 (1981)

    1981

  44. [52]

    Rousseau, A new quantum mechanical derivation of the photocounting distribution, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 10, 1043 (1977)

    M. Rousseau, A new quantum mechanical derivation of the photocounting distribution, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 10, 1043 (1977)

    1977

  45. [53]

    Mollow, Quantum theory of field attenuation, Physical Review 168, 1896 (1968)

    B. Mollow, Quantum theory of field attenuation, Physical Review 168, 1896 (1968)

    1968

  46. [54]

    Kelley and W

    P. Kelley and W. Kleiner, Theory of electromagnetic field measurement and photoelectron counting, Physical Re- view 136, A316 (1964)

    1964

  47. [55]

    Grochmalicki and M

    J. Grochmalicki and M. Lewenstein, Are squeezed states necessary? a case study of photon detection based on quantum interference, Physics reports 208, 189 (1991). 19

    1991

  48. [56]

    Sudarshan, Equivalence of semiclassical and quantum mechanical descriptions of statistical light beams, Phys- ical Review Letters 10, 277 (1963)

    E. Sudarshan, Equivalence of semiclassical and quantum mechanical descriptions of statistical light beams, Phys- ical Review Letters 10, 277 (1963)

    1963

  49. [57]

    Wiener, Generalized harmonic analysis, Acta mathe- matica 55, 117 (1930)

    N. Wiener, Generalized harmonic analysis, Acta mathe- matica 55, 117 (1930)

    1930

  50. [58]

    Khintchine, Korrelationstheorie der station¨ aren stochastischen prozesse, Mathematische Annalen 109, 604 (1934)

    A. Khintchine, Korrelationstheorie der station¨ aren stochastischen prozesse, Mathematische Annalen 109, 604 (1934)

    1934

  51. [59]

    Eberly and K

    J. Eberly and K. Wodkiewicz, The time-dependent phys- ical spectrum of light, JOSA 67, 1252 (1977)

    1977

  52. [60]

    Eberly, C

    J. Eberly, C. Kunasz, and K. Wodkiewicz, Time- dependent spectrum of resonance fluorescence, Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics13, 217 (1980)

    1980

  53. [61]

    Amini, J

    K. Amini, J. Biegert, F. Calegari, A. Chac´ on, M. F. Ciappina, A. Dauphin, D. K. Efimov, C. F. de Moris- son Faria, K. Giergiel, P. Gniewek, et al. , Symphony on strong field approximation, Reports on Progress in Physics 82, 116001 (2019)

    2019

  54. [62]

    Smirnova and M

    O. Smirnova and M. Ivanov, Multielectron high harmonic generation: simple man on a complex plane, Attosecond and XUV Physics: Ultrafast Dynamics and Spectroscopy , 201 (2014)

    2014

  55. [63]

    Rivera-Dean, P

    J. Rivera-Dean, P. Stammer, M. Ciappina, and M. Lewenstein, Non-classicality induces recombination in high-harmonic generation with circularly polarized fields, arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.11042 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Eberly and M

    J. Eberly and M. Fedorov, Spectrum of light scattered co- herently or incoherently by a collection of atoms, Physical Review A 45, 4706 (1992)

    1992

  57. [65]

    J. D. Cresser, Theory of the spectrum of the quantised light field, Physics Reports 94, 47 (1983)

    1983

  58. [66]

    M. D. Perry and J. K. Crane, High-order harmonic emis- sion from mixed fields, Physical Review A 48, R4051 (1993)

    1993

  59. [67]

    Nabekawa, T

    Y. Nabekawa, T. Shimizu, T. Okino, K. Furusawa, H. Hasegawa, K. Yamanouchi, and K. Midorikawa, Inter- ferometric autocorrelation of an attosecond pulse train in the single-cycle regime, Physical review letters 97, 153904 (2006)

    2006

  60. [68]

    Nabekawa, T

    Y. Nabekawa, T. Shimizu, Y. Furukawa, E. J. Takahashi, and K. Midorikawa, Interferometry of attosecond pulse trains in the extreme ultraviolet wavelength region, Phys- ical review letters 102, 213904 (2009)

    2009

  61. [69]

    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

  62. [70]

    Stammer, Absence of quantum optical coherence in high harmonic generation, Physical Review Research 6, L032033 (2024)

    P. Stammer, Absence of quantum optical coherence in high harmonic generation, Physical Review Research 6, L032033 (2024)

    2024

  63. [71]

    Rivera-Dean, H

    J. Rivera-Dean, H. Crispin, P. Stammer, T. Lamprou, E. Pisanty, M. Kr¨ uger, P. Tzallas, M. Lewenstein, and M. Ciappina, Squeezed states of light after high-order harmonic generation in excited atomic systems, Physical Review A 110, 063118 (2024)

    2024

  64. [72]

    Ghimire and D

    S. Ghimire and D. A. Reis, High-harmonic generation from solids, Nature physics 15, 10 (2019)

    2019

  65. [73]

    Goulielmakis and T

    E. Goulielmakis and T. Brabec, High harmonic gener- ation in condensed matter, Nature Photonics 16, 411 (2022)

    2022

  66. [74]

    Silva, I

    R. 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 Photonics 12, 266 (2018)

    2018

  67. [75]

    Silva, ´A

    R. Silva, ´A. Jim´ enez-Gal´ an, B. Amorim, O. Smirnova, and M. Ivanov, Topological strong-field physics on sub- laser-cycle timescale, Nature Photonics 13, 849 (2019)

    2019

  68. [76]

    Jim´ enez-Gal´ an, R

    A. Jim´ enez-Gal´ an, R. Silva, O. Smirnova, and M. Ivanov, Lightwave control of topological properties in 2d materi- als for sub-cycle and non-resonant valley manipulation, Nature Photonics 14, 728 (2020)

    2020

  69. [77]

    Scheel, Single-photon sources–an introduction, Journal of Modern Optics 56, 141 (2009)

    S. Scheel, Single-photon sources–an introduction, Journal of Modern Optics 56, 141 (2009)

    2009

  70. [78]

    Mandel, Sub-poissonian photon statistics in resonance fluorescence, Optics letters 4, 205 (1979)

    L. Mandel, Sub-poissonian photon statistics in resonance fluorescence, Optics letters 4, 205 (1979)

    1979

  71. [79]

    X. T. Zou and L. Mandel, Photon-antibunching and sub-poissonian photon statistics, Phys. Rev. A 41, 475 (1990)

    1990

  72. [80]

    Lemieux, S

    S. Lemieux, S. A. Jalil, D. Purschke, N. Boroumand, D. Villeneuve, A. Naumov, T. Brabec, and G. Vampa, Photon bunching in high-harmonic emission controlled by quantum light, arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.05474 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  73. [81]

    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,et al. , Evidence of the quan- tum optical nature of high-harmonic generation, PRX Quantum 5, 040319 (2024)

    2024

  74. [82]

    van der Veen and D

    J. van der Veen and D. F. James, Errors in quantum state identification with ultrashort pulses, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.22817 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  75. [83]

    C. S. Lange and L. B. Madsen, Hierarchy of approxima- tions for describing quantum light from high-harmonic generation: A fermi-hubbard-model study, Physical Re- view A 111, 013113 (2025)

    2025

  76. [84]

    N. Lu, P. Berman, Y. Bai, J. Golub, and T. Mossberg, Time-dependent spectrum of resonance fluorescence for atoms prepared in pure dressed states, Physical Review A 34, 319 (1986)

    1986

  77. [85]

    Brenner and K

    K.-H. Brenner and K. Wodkiewicz, The time-dependent physical spectrum of light and the wigner distribution function, Optics Communications 43, 103 (1982)

    1982

  78. [86]

    Wodkiewicz, B

    K. Wodkiewicz, B. Shore, and J. Eberly, Noise in strong laser-atom interactions: Frequency fluctuations and non- exponential correlations, Physical Review A 30, 2390 (1984)

    1984

  79. [87]

    Eberly, K

    J. Eberly, K. Wodkiewicz, and B. Shore, Noise in strong laser-atom interactions: Phase telegraph noise, Physical Review A 30, 2381 (1984)

    1984

  80. [88]

    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 Physics , 1 (2024)

    2024

  81. [89]

    Stammer, On the limitations of the semi-classical pic- ture in high harmonic generation, Nature Physics 20, 1040 (2024)

    P. Stammer, On the limitations of the semi-classical pic- ture in high harmonic generation, Nature Physics 20, 1040 (2024)

    2024

  82. [90]

    Smirnova and M

    O. Smirnova and M. Ivanov, Multielectron high harmonic generation: Simple man on a complex plane, in Attosec- ond and XUV Physics (John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2014) Chap. 7, pp. 201–256

    2014

  83. [91]

    Podolsky and L

    B. Podolsky and L. Pauling, The Momentum Distribu- tion in Hydrogen-Like Atoms, Physical Review 34, 109 (1929). 20 APPENDIX A. Details on the Heisenberg equations of motion

    1929

  84. [92]

    Derivation of the Heisenberg equation of motion for the field operator The equation of motion of the annihilation operator aq,λ(t) in (8) can be obtained by using the Heisenberg equation d dtaq,λ(t) = i ℏ [H(t),aq,λ(t)] (A1) = i ℏU†(t) [H,aq,λ]U(t), (A2) where the Hamiltonian ...

  85. [93]

    (9) we consider the corresponding Heisenberg EOM d dtdi(t) = i ℏU†(t) [H, di]U(t), (A12) where we again have the HamiltonianH =HF +HS +HI from Eq

    Heisenberg picture for the dipole moment with the semi-classical interaction For the dynamics of the time-dependent dipole mo- ment di(t) in Eq. (9) we consider the corresponding Heisenberg EOM d dtdi(t) = i ℏU†(t) [H, di]U(t), (A12) where we again have the HamiltonianH =HF +H...

    2000

  86. [94]

    (72) in the main manuscript ⟨N (t,τ )⟩ =g4q2 Z t t0 dt1 Z t+τ t0 dt2 Z t+τ t0 dt3 Z t t0 dt4e−iωq(t1+t2−t3−t4)⟨d(t1)d(t2)d(t3)d(t4)⟩

    Further analysis We start with the exact expression of Eq. (72) in the main manuscript ⟨N (t,τ )⟩ =g4q2 Z t t0 dt1 Z t+τ t0 dt2 Z t+τ t0 dt3 Z t t0 dt4e−iωq(t1+t2−t3−t4)⟨d(t1)d(t2)d(t3)d(t4)⟩. (C1) First, we substitute ti =ti−τ for i = 2, 3, such that ⟨N (t,τ )⟩ =g4q2 Z t t0 d...

  87. [95]

    (C9) We begin this analysis by looking at Eq

    Analysis of Eq. (C9) We begin this analysis by looking at Eq. (C9), which is the more complicated one. The lessons learned here will then be applied to compute Eq. (C8). From (C9), we are mostly interested in the momentum integrations as they are the ones we can simplify the m...

  88. [96]

    (C8) From the analysis we have done thus far, analytical expression for Eq

    Analysis of Eq. (C8) From the analysis we have done thus far, analytical expression for Eq. (C8) are more straightforward. From this contribution, we are only interested in the real part, although here we evaluate the complete integral without distinguishing between real or im...

  89. [97]

    This has the advantage of being a dimensionless measure independent of the order of magnitude of the intensities

    Normalized second order correlation function A more useful measure of the second order correlation function (the intensity correlation function) is the normalized version of it. This has the advantage of being a dimensionless measure independent of the order of magnitude of th...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.