Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 1 cited by

Quantum engineering of high harmonic generation

T0 review · 3 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Quantum sideband high harmonic generation can be projectively engineered into single photons, Schrödinger cats, and photon-added squeezed vacuum states.

desk verdict Careful derivation of a QSHHG wavefunction and projective non-classical states, but the practical near-unity-efficiency regime sits outside the derivation's validity. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.22536 v1 pith:AHWXTZZ6 submitted 2025-05-28 quant-ph

Neda Boroumand , Adam Thorpe , Graeme Bart , Lu Wang , David N. Purschke , Giulio Vampa , Thomas Brabec This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords quantumsidebandhighharmonicgenerationbrightsqueezedvacuummulti-modeentanglementprojectivemeasurementSchrödingercatstatesphoton-addedXUVlightsourceconversionefficiency
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 develops a closed-form, quantum-optical theory of quantum sideband high harmonic generation (QSHHG), in which an intense classical laser produces high harmonics while a bright squeezed vacuum perturbs them into sidebands. It claims that QSHHG creates multi-mode entanglement between the harmonic sideband modes and the perturbing quantum mode, even though the sidebands alone show no non-classical statistics. The central result is that a projective measurement on either side — counting photons in the quantum mode or in a sideband — collapses the other side into states used in quantum information science: heralded single-photon states, Schrödinger cat states, and photon-added squeezed vacuum states. If correct, this provides a route to engineering quantum light at XUV wavelengths from a weak quantum seed rather than by driving the whole process with a quantum field.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the normal-ordered QSHHG wavefunction, $|\phi_m\rangle = \frac{\mathcal{N}}{\sqrt{\cosh(r)}} \exp(\sum_\kappa Z_\kappa \hat a^\dagger_\kappa \hat a^\dagger_q) \exp(-\bar\beta \hat a^{\dagger 2}_q)|v v_q\rangle$, obtained by applying a unitary mixed-mode squeezed operator $\hat S_m$ to a bright squeezed vacuum state. It is a two-mode-squeezing generator coupling each harmonic sideband mode $\kappa$ to the single perturbative mode $q$, with coefficients $Z_\kappa = f_\kappa - g_\kappa \tanh(r)e^{i\theta}$ combining difference- and sum-frequency sideband amplitudes. The companion effective-mode operator $\hat a_N = |\zeta_N|^{-1}\sum_{\kappa\in N} Z_\kappa^* \hat a_\kappa$ packages all plane-wave modes of one sideband into a single harmonic oscillator. This wavefunction carries the argument: every later result — the sideband photon-number distribution, the washed-out non-classicality after tracing, and the two families of projected non-classical states — is read directly from its Taylor expansion.

What would settle it

Measure the second-order coherence $g^{(2)}(0)$ and quadrature variances of a QSHH sideband after projecting on photon number $l$ in the quantum mode; the paper predicts $g^{(2)}(0)=1/\tanh^2(|\alpha_N|)$ for even $l$ and $\tanh^2(|\alpha_N|)$ for odd $l$, so a deviation from these closed forms at accessible $l$ would falsify the normal-ordered wavefunction. A second falsifier is a direct photon-number correlation measurement between sideband and quantum mode: absence of the even-even/odd-odd checkerboard structure of the two-mode distribution would rule out the entanglement claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In the low-conversion-efficiency regime $|Z_\kappa|^2 \ll 1$ and $r \gg 1$, the full QSHHG wavefunction normal-orders to $|\phi_m\rangle = \frac{\mathcal{N}}{\sqrt{\cosh(r)}} \exp(\sum_\kappa Z_\kappa \hat a^\dagger_\kappa \hat a^\dagger_q) \exp(-\bar\beta \hat a^{\dagger 2}_q)|v v_q\rangle$, a two-mode squeezed form that couples every harmonic sideband to the single perturbative mode. This entangles even-even and odd-odd photon-number states of the sidebands with the quantum mode. Tracing out the quantum mode yields super-Poissonian, bunched statistics with no squeezing, no sub-Poissonian statistics, and no negative Wigner function, which the paper identifies as the reason non-classical features have not been observed in QSHHG. Projecting on a fixed photon number $l$ in the quantum mode produces a parity-restricted sideband superposition (Eq. 27) that ranges from a heralded single-photon state at small $l$ to a Schrödinger cat state (a coherent-state superposition with only even or only odd photon numbers) at large $l$; projecting on $m$ sideband photons produces an $m$-photon-added squeezed vacuum state in the quantum mode (Eq. 30). The theory also predicts that solids are far more susceptible to the quantum perturbation than gases, with the sideband-to-harmonic ratio scaling as $R \propto I_0/(8\omega_0^5 m_*^2)$, so material and laser optimization could raise sideband conversion efficiency by many orders of magnitude.

Load-bearing premise

The derivation of the normal-ordered wavefunction and all projected non-classical states assumes low conversion efficiency, $|Z_\kappa|^2 \ll 1$, with a very bright squeezed vacuum ($r \gg 1$), yet the scheme's path to practicality — near-unity conversion efficiency — lies outside this regime and is supported only by analogy to a different sum-frequency experiment.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A heralded single-photon source in the XUV becomes in principle available: projecting on $l=1$ in the quantum mode collapses the sideband mainly into a one-photon state, whose creation rate can be raised by increasing conversion efficiency.
  • Projecting on $m$ sideband photons creates an $m$-photon-added squeezed vacuum state, which the paper notes can measure phase closer to the Heisenberg limit than a squeezed vacuum alone and which is detectable by homodyne techniques.
  • Schrödinger cat states of the sideband require projecting on very bright quantum modes ($l \sim 10^{10}$), so their observation demands photon-number resolution with preserved parity, or at least a $g^{(2)}(0)\to 1$ and excess quadrature noise as indirect signatures.
  • Because the sideband alone shows only classical-like bunching, experiments must either measure all entangled sidebands simultaneously or restrict emission to selected sidebands to avoid generating mixed states.
  • The predicted scaling with $1/(\omega_0^5 m_*^2)$ implies that low-effective-mass solids driven at longer wavelengths, with possible metasurface enhancement, could push sideband conversion efficiency from $10^{-9}$ toward unity, enabling frequency conversion of weak quantum states to short wavelengths.

Reading between the lines

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

  • This points toward a concrete materials search beyond the paper's ZnO example: narrow-gap, low-effective-mass semiconductors driven at mid-infrared wavelengths are the natural experimental testbed for the efficiency scaling.
  • The parity-preserving cat-state measurement the paper discusses suggests that a simpler diagnostic — measuring $g^{(2)}(0)\to 1$ and quadrature excess noise over a window of projected photon numbers — could serve as a practical first test without single-photon resolution.
  • If near-unity conversion efficiency is reached, the same sum-frequency mechanism would effectively realize a quantum up-converter for Fock and Bell states into the XUV; this extends the paper's low-efficiency derivation, which does not cover that regime.
  • The two-mode checkerboard entanglement pattern implies that QSHHG could be developed into a multi-mode continuous-variable resource for short-wavelength quantum networks, but the paper leaves the quantitative multi-mode analysis open.
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

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a closed-form quantum-optical theory of quantum sideband high-harmonic generation (QSHHG), in which conventional HHG driven by a classical laser is perturbed by a bright squeezed vacuum (BSV) beam at twice the fundamental frequency. Generalizing the Lewenstein model, the authors derive a photon wavefunction that factorizes into a coherent HHG state and a mixed-mode squeezed QSHHG state, Eqs. (1)-(6), stated to be valid for r > 1 and |Z_κ|² ≪ 1. Macroscopic photon-number formulas for atoms and solids (Eqs. (17)-(20)) are compared at the order-of-magnitude level with a recent experiment [22], and the traced QSHHG distribution (Eq. (26)) is shown to be super-Poissonian with no non-classical features at low conversion efficiency. The central results concern projective measurements on the entangled two-mode wavefunction (Eq. (23)): projecting onto a number state l of the BSV mode yields even/odd harmonic states interpolating between a heralded single-photon state and an optical Schrödinger-cat-like state (Eq. (27)), while projecting onto m photons of the harmonic mode yields an m-photon-added squeezed vacuum state (Eq. (30)). The paper closes by discussing experimental obstacles, including the low heralding probability at current parameters and a proposed route to higher conversion efficiencies through material and laser optimization.

Significance. If the results hold, this is a significant step: a closed-form, Schrödinger-equation-based wavefunction for QSHHG that identifies an entanglement structure between the harmonic sidebands and the perturbing quantum mode, with recipes for heralded single-photon states, even/odd cat-like states, and photon-added squeezed vacuum states. The paper's strengths are real: the derivation starts from the microscopic Hamiltonian rather than from the target state; the validity limits (r > 1, |Z_κ|² ≪ 1) are stated explicitly; the analytical results are checked against numerical evaluation of the normal-ordered wavefunction (supplement Figs. S1, S2, S4); and the predicted θ-modulation of the sideband strength (Fig. 1(c)) is a falsifiable signature. The quantitative comparison with experiment [22] is useful, though partly calibrated (major comment 3). The dominant weakness is scope: the proven results live at conversion efficiencies where the paper itself reports heralding probabilities near 10^-15, while the 'quantum engineering' narrative in the abstract and conclusions depends on extrapolating the same formulas to |ζ_N|² ~ 10^-3 and beyond, a regime the derivation does not cover.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sections II.A, III.A, III.C (Eqs. (5), (23), (24))] The normal-ordered wavefunction (5)/(23) is stated to be valid for r > 1 and |Z_κ|² ≪ 1, and every projected state and observable in the paper, Eqs. (27)-(34), inherits that restriction, with the supplement's numerical checks covering only |ζ_N|² ≈ 3×10^-7. Yet the route to practical rates proposed in Section III.A (text after Eq. (24)) is to raise the conversion efficiency by six orders of magnitude (from 10^-9 to ≈ 0.005) and ultimately to 'approach unity,' and Section III.C applies the low-efficiency scaling P ∝ (|ζ_N|²)^{2m+η}/cosh(r) to predict a boosted single-photon probability of 10^-4 while reducing r at fixed ⟨n⟩_N. In that scenario |ζ_N|² reaches ≈ 3×10^-3, where the condition |Z_κ|² ≪ 1 fails and the normal-ordering truncations leading to Eq. (23) are unverified; the near-unity-efficiency case is supported only by citing a different sum-frequency process [35]. The abstract's claim of quantum engineering is therefore established only in a regime where the paper itself reports heralding probabilities of order 10^-15. I request that the authors either (a) verify Eqs. (27)-(34) for |ζ_N|² up to and beyond 10^-3, by numerical solution of the few-mode problem or by carrying the normal-ordering expansion to higher order, or (b) explicitly mark the efficiency-boosted predictions as extrapolations and separate them from the proven low-efficiency results.
  2. [Supplement, Eqs. (S13)-(S15), (S52)-(S54)] The derivation truncates the Magnus-Fer expansion at lowest order, discards the commutator term (S13), neglects the 'small' non-unitary residual after integration by parts (main text Section II.B; supplement between Eqs. (S14) and (S15)), and drops the BCH commutators between HHG and QSHHG mode operators (S52)-(S54). Parametric smallness in |f_κ|, |g_κ| ≪ 1 is asserted for several of these terms, but no quantitative estimate is given, and the product Ansatz |ϕ_0⟩ = |ϕ_h⟩|ϕ_m⟩ of Eq. (1) is load-bearing for the entire wavefunction treatment. Since the reader cannot gauge the accuracy of Eq. (23) from the text as it stands, I request an explicit estimate (or a direct numerical check) of the neglected terms in the representative ZnO and hydrogen configurations of Fig. 1.
  3. [Section II.D, Eqs. (19)-(20); supplement Section II.B] The BSV mode volume (Δq)³ is a free parameter that is fixed using the same experiment against which the photon-number predictions are then compared: Section II.D states the mode volume is chosen 'in accordance with experiments [22],' and the supplement (Section II.B) justifies the plane-wave-to-BSV correction by 'the good agreement between experiment and theory with regard to the number of emitted sideband photons.' Because of this calibration, the claimed 'order of magnitude predictive power' for sideband photon numbers (abstract; Section III.A) is partly a consistency check rather than a free prediction. This does not invalidate the entanglement and projected-state results, but the manuscript should state explicitly which quantities are calibrated and which are predicted, and ideally present a quantitative prediction for a configuration not yet measured (the θ-dependence of Fig. 1(c) would be a good candidate).
minor comments (7)
  1. [References; Section II.A] Reference [23], the supplementary material, is an empty entry in the reference list, so in-text citations such as 'the supplement [23]' and 'Fig. (S5) of [23]' cannot be resolved by the reader.
  2. [Eq. (5)] The symbol β is overloaded in Eq. (5): it is first defined as β = (1/2)tanh(r)e^{-iθ} and then redefined as β/(1+Σ_κ|Z_κ|²); the supplement uses β_κ and β_N for the renormalized quantity, and the main text should do the same.
  3. [Eq. (27)] The coefficient notation '√α_N^{2m+η}' in Eq. (27) is ambiguous; the supplement (Eq. (S81)) shows the intended expression is α_N^{m+η/2} up to l-dependent normalization factors, and this should be written unambiguously.
  4. [Eq. (31)] In Eq. (31) the second term contains the factor 'l 2', which appears to be a typo for 'm/2' from the supplement's Eq. (S86); the arrangement of the (2m−1)!! prefactor also differs from the supplement, so this formula should be reconciled and re-displayed.
  5. [Eqs. (33)-(34) and (S94)-(S95)] The displayed quadrature-variance formulas are inconsistent among Eq. (33), Eq. (34), and supplement Eqs. (S94)-(S95) in the placement of the factor (2m+1)/4 and in the handling of the A_j(r,θ) term; since these formulas underlie Fig. 5, a single consistent derivation should be presented.
  6. [Section II.B; supplement Eq. (S20)] The ad-hoc higher-return suppression filter ξ(t−t′) (zero for the first return, 10(t−t′)/T_0 in the second half-cycle, and infinite beyond one period) is a significant modeling choice; a brief sensitivity discussion and a statement of its effect on the predicted |ζ_N|² values would be helpful.
  7. [Fig. 1 caption] The caption of Fig. 1 should state explicitly that panels (a) and (b) are θ-averaged, and the symbol/color mapping of panel (c) (four symbol types for four θ values) should be decoded more clearly.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Self-contained derivation from the Schrödinger equation; only peripheral circularity from using the same experiment [22] to set the BSV mode volume and r before comparing sideband photon numbers with that experiment.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section II.D (Phase matching), Eqs. (19)-(20); Section III.A]
    "It should be noted that we have approximated the temporally and spatially finite BSV field by a plane wave. This is being corrected for by replacing the plane wave mode volume by the experimentally measured BSV mode volume [22]. ... In accordance with experiments [22], we choose a transverse width wq = 100 µm and bandwidth ∆λ q = 50 nm."

    The absolute QSHHG photon number in Eq. (19), <n>_N = c_q^2 cosh^2(r) ∫ dω |ζ_k|^2, is proportional to c_q^2, which contains (Δq)^3 through c_q^2 = (N0 w_k l_i)^2/(2c V^2) (Δq)^3/(2π)^3 in Eq. (20). Both the BSV mode volume (Δq)^3 and r = 13.6 are taken from the same experiment [22] whose sideband counts are later used to claim 'order of magnitude predictive power' and agreement with the HHG:QSHHG ratio. The comparison of absolute sideband photon numbers is therefore not an independent check: an experimental input from the target measurement is used to normalize the prediction. This does not affect the structure of Eq. (23) or the projected states in Eqs. (27) and (30), so the circularity is peripheral rather than load-bearing.

full rationale

The central derivation is not circular. Eq. (5)/(23) is obtained from the Schrödinger equation (S1) via the strong-field ansatz (S3), operator normal ordering (S55)-(S62), and phase-matching integrals, without assuming the target projected states. The projected states (27) and (30), and the resulting g(2) and quadrature formulas, are Taylor expansions of this wavefunction. Citations to [25] and [12] are not load-bearing: [25] is only a comparison of coefficient forms, and [12] gives a previously known Bogoliubov route to the same g(2)/quadrature results that the supplement re-derives from Eq. (S69). The one circularity-adjacent element is the calibration of the BSV mode volume and r using the same experiment [22] that is later quoted for 'order of magnitude predictive power' and agreement of the HHG:QSHHG ratio; this affects absolute sideband photon rates but not the entanglement structure or projected-state predictions. A separate domain-of-validity limitation, flagged in the paper itself ('the normal-ordered wavefunction has been derived in the limit of an intense squeezed vacuum beam with r > 1 and |Z_kappa|^2 << 1'), is that the proposed near-unity conversion efficiency lies outside the regime of Eq. (23), so the practical efficiency-boost estimates and the unity-efficiency SFG argument (citing [35]) are not supported by the same derivation. This lowers predictive confidence but is not a circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The algebraic form of the QSHHG wavefunction (Eq. 5/23) is the foundation for all entanglement and non-classical state claims. It is obtained from the Schrodinger equation under the listed strong-field and truncation assumptions. The free parameters set the magnitude of the sideband photon numbers and hence rates and conversion efficiency, but do not change the qualitative entanglement structure. No new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (4)
  • harmonic beam width w_k = 40 micrometers (assumed half of laser beam width)
    Chosen by hand from the laser beam width; affects macroscopic photon numbers in Eqs. (17)-(20).
  • BSV mode volume (Delta q)^3 = from w_q = 100 micrometers, Delta lambda_q = 50 nm
    Set to the experimentally measured BSV mode volume [22]; used to normalize QSHHG photon numbers and the ratio to HHG.
  • squeezing parameter r = r = 13.6
    Fixed by the experimental pulse energy 10 nJ via hbar omega_q sinh^2 r = 10^-8 J; an input from [22], not fitted to the theory's target predictions.
  • higher-return suppression filter xi(t-t') = 0 for t-t' <= T0/2, 10(t-t')/T0 for T0/2 <= t-t' <= T0, infinity beyond
    Ad hoc dephasing filter chosen to keep only the first recollision; affects the HHG and QSHHG coefficients h, f, g in Eqs. (7),(12),(13).
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Strong-field approximation: continuum electron is treated as a free particle in the laser field; Coulomb potential neglected
    Invoked in supplement Eq. (S5) discussion and main text Section II.B for Lewenstein-type coefficients.
  • domain assumption Plane-wave continuum states and approximate orthogonality <p|0> approx 0
    Used to derive coupled photon-wavefunction equations in supplement Eq. (S3).
  • domain assumption Weak ground-state depletion allows |phi_0(t')> to be pulled out of the time integral; higher-order terms neglected
    Supplement Eqs. (S10)-(S11), basis of exponential solution (S12).
  • ad hoc to paper HHG and QSHHG modes are independent; three-photon processes and mode-overlap commutators are neglected
    Main text after Eq. (1) and supplement after Eq. (S28); needed for product form |phi> = D_h S_m |0>.
  • ad hoc to paper Magnus-Fer expansion truncated to lowest order; commutator term (S13) and non-unitary residual after integration by parts are small
    Supplement Eq. (S13) and discussion near Eqs. (S14)-(S15); if not small, unitary squeezing form Eq. (3) breaks down.
  • ad hoc to paper Normal-ordering approximations r >> 1 and |Z_kappa|^2 << 1
    Used to derive normal-ordered wavefunction Eq. (5) and all subsequent state predictions; conflicts with the paper's proposed near-unity conversion regime.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum engineering of high harmonic generation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AHWXTZZ6

@misc{pith2026250522536,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum engineering of high harmonic generation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AHWXTZZ6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.22536}
}
read the original abstract

In quantum sideband high harmonic generation (QSHHG), high harmonic generation is perturbed by a bright quantum field resulting in harmonic sidebands, with the intent to transfer non-classical properties from the quantum perturbation to the harmonic sidebands. So far, non-classical features have not been found in QSHHG yet. The closed form theory of QSHHG in atoms and solids developed here answers the question under which conditions non-classical features can be realized. QSHHG results in a multi-mode entanglement between harmonic sideband modes and perturbative quantum mode. A projective measurement on either creates a variety of non-classical states commonly used in quantum information science. This opens a pathway towards quantum engineering high harmonic generation as a short wavelength source for quantum information science.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.22536 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a-c) HHG (odd) and QSHHG (even) spectrum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) Two-mode probability of QSHHG versus photon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a) Probability of QSHHG versus harmonic photon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Parameters are the same as in Fig.1; (a-d) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) second order correlation g (2) N (0) versus m; in￾dependent of all other parameters. (b) Quadrature variances ∆X 2 jN (θ) (j = 1, 2) for squeezed vacuum angle θ versus har￾monic photon number m; evaluated for the effective QSHH order N = 8; parameters from [PITH_F…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [22]

    Földi, I

    P. Földi, I. Magashegyi, Á. Gombköto, and S. Varró, in Photonics, Vol. 8 (MDPI, 2021) p. 263

    work page 2021

  2. [35]

    Heimerl, A

    J. Heimerl, A. Mikhaylov, S. Meier, H. Höllerer, I. Kaminer, M. Chekhova, and P. Hommelhoff, Nature Physics 20, 945 (2024)

    work page 2024

  3. [1]

    Krausz and M

    F. Krausz and M. Ivanov, Reviews of Modern Physics 81, 163 (2009)

    2009

  4. [2]

    When the quantum mode is traced over in this three-mode case, all (even-even, odd-odd, and even-odd) states of the two harmonic modes will be populated

    Exploring multi-mode correlation presents an interesting avenue for future work. When the quantum mode is traced over in this three-mode case, all (even-even, odd-odd, and even-odd) states of the two harmonic modes will be populated. It is expected that this will also suppress non-classical properties and en- tanglement between harmonic modes, for low con...

    work page

  5. [3]

    The resulting QSHH mode would be squeezed and highly efficient, as all pho- ton pairs in the perturbation beam would get converted to that particular sideband [35]

    transitions into a two-mode sum-frequency operator. The resulting QSHH mode would be squeezed and highly efficient, as all pho- ton pairs in the perturbation beam would get converted to that particular sideband [35]. Sideband selection can potentially be obtained through resonances of a material [36, 37] or a meta-surface, or through phase matching. Finally...

    work page

  6. [4]

    Goulielmakis and T

    E. Goulielmakis and T. Brabec, Nature Photonics 16, 411 (2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [5]

    The expansion coefficient of the squeezed vacuum operator is denoted by j and the photon number of the quantum mode is given by l = 2j + 2n + 2m + ηn + ηm

    yields operator terms ∑ mnj(ˆa† N )2n+η n (ˆa† N ′ )2m+η m(ˆa† q)j, where ηn, η m = 0 , 1 for even, odd harmonic photon num- ber states, respectively. The expansion coefficient of the squeezed vacuum operator is denoted by j and the photon number of the quantum mode is given by l = 2j + 2n + 2m + ηn + ηm. As a result, l can only be odd when only one of the ...

    work page

  8. [6]

    Gonoskov, N

    I. Gonoskov, N. Tsatrafyllis, I. Kominis, and P. Tzallas, Scientific Reports 6, 32821 (2016)

    work page 2016

Show all 63 references
  1. [7]

    The main difference comes from the additional σ q dependence outside the curled brackets in Eqs

    and ( 12), ( 13). The main difference comes from the additional σ q dependence outside the curled brackets in Eqs. ( 12) and ( 13). By denoting the ratio of QSHHG and HHG as R – a measure of the susceptibility to the quantum perturbation – we see that R ∝ |σq|2 ∝ I0 ω 2 0 1 ω 3...

  2. [8]

    followed by a projection on |l⟩q. The projected wavefunction, |ϕ N ⟩ = q⟨l|ϕ m⟩, is found to be [23], |ϕ N ⟩= Nη (−eiθ)l/ 2 lη / 2∑ m=0 (−1)m √α N 2m+η √ (2m + η)! |2m + η⟩N α N = lη |ζN |2 2βN , l η = l − η, η = 0, 1 for even, odd l Nη =0 ≈ 1√ cosh(|α N |) Nη =1 ≈ 1√ sinh(|α ...

  3. [9]

    taken from ⟨ˆn⟩N for N = 8 in 1(c), respectively. (a),(c) ∆ X 2 jN (θ = 0, π/ 2) versus quantum photon number l, respec- tively; blue dotted, red full lines show ∆ X 2 jN for j = 1 , 2 respectively; symbols: in (a-c) squares and dots represent η = 0 , 1 (even, odd states), res...

  4. [10]

    Tsatrafyllis, S

    N. Tsatrafyllis, S. Kühn, M. Dumergue, P. Foldi, S. Kahaly, E. Cormier, I. Gonoskov, B. Kiss, K. Varju, S. Varro, et al. , Physical Review Letters 122, 193602 (2019)

    2019

  5. [11]

    under the assumption that only one sideband is generated

    with one QSHH mode, i.e. under the assumption that only one sideband is generated. Tracing out the other sidebands in a multi- mode scenario will modify the parameters ζN and βN , but will leave the two-mode wavefunction unchanged oth- erwise. In a projective measurement, the ...

  6. [12]

    This yields |ϕ q⟩ = Nm ∞∑ l=0 (−1)l √ (2l + m)! l! β l N |2l + m⟩q

    limited to two modes, |ϕ q⟩ = N ⟨m|ϕ m⟩. This yields |ϕ q⟩ = Nm ∞∑ l=0 (−1)l √ (2l + m)! l! β l N |2l + m⟩q . (30) The norm is given by 1 N 2m ≈ cosh(r)√ 1 + 2⟨ˆn⟩N [ (2m − 1)!! ( sinh(r) 1+2 ⟨ˆn⟩N )m + l 2 (3m − 1)(2m − 3)!! ( sinh(r) 1 + 2⟨ˆn⟩N )m−1] . (31) With the above wa...

  7. [13]

    Stammer, J

    P. Stammer, J. Rivera-Dean, A. Maxwell, T. Lamprou, A. Ordóñez, M. F. Ciappina, P. Tzallas, and M. Lewen- stein, PRX Quantum 4, 010201 (2023)

    2023

  8. [14]

    Rivera-Dean, P

    J. Rivera-Dean, P. Stammer, A. S. Maxwell, T. Lam- prou, P. Tzallas, M. Lewenstein, and M. F. Ciappina, Physical Review A 106, 063705 (2022)

    2022

  9. [15]

    Sloan, A

    J. Sloan, A. Gorlach, M. E. Tzur, N. Rivera, O. Co- hen, I. Kaminer, and M. Soljačić, arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.16466 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  10. [16]

    Lewenstein, P

    M. Lewenstein, P. Balcou, M. Y. Ivanov, A. L’huillier, and P. Corkum, Physical Review A 49, 2117 (1994)

    1994

  11. [17]

    Corkum, Physical Review Letters 71, 1994 (1993)

    P. Corkum, Physical Review Letters 71, 1994 (1993)

    1993

  12. [19]

    Ghimire, A

    S. Ghimire, A. D. DiChiara, E. Sistrunk, P. Agostini, L. F. DiMauro, and D. A. Reis, Nature physics 7, 138 (2011)

    2011

  13. [20]

    Rasputnyi, Z

    A. Rasputnyi, Z. Chen, M. Birk, O. Cohen, I. Kaminer, M. Krüger, D. Seletskiy, M. Chekhova, and F. Tani, Nature Physics 20, 1960 (2024)

    2024

  14. [23]

    as P (m, n ) = |⟨m, n |ϕ m⟩|2 , (25) where m, n refer to the photon number of the QSHH, and perturbative quantum mode, respectively. By summing over n, P (m) = ∑ n P (m, n ), and assuming an intense squeezed vacuum field r ≫ 1, one obtains the QSHHG photon distribution, P (m) ≈...

  15. [24]

    We decrease r so 9 that the average number of photons, ˆnN = |ζN |2 cosh2(r) remains constant

    that it can be increased by more than six orders of magnitude by opti- mizing material and laser parameters. We decrease r so 9 that the average number of photons, ˆnN = |ζN |2 cosh2(r) remains constant. As a result cosh(r) decreases by three orders of magnitude, and the proba...

  16. [25]

    Clearly, harmonic and quantum modes are entangled, as only even-even or odd-odd states are populated

    and ( 23). Clearly, harmonic and quantum modes are entangled, as only even-even or odd-odd states are populated. Due to the large value of r, the probabil- ity extends to very high photon numbers in the quantum mode. The states m > n are approximately zero, accu- rate to first ...

  17. [26]

    Gombkötő, P

    Á. Gombkötő, P. Földi, and S. Varró, Physical Review A 104, 033703 (2021)

    2021

  18. [27]

    Rivera-Dean, P

    J. Rivera-Dean, P. Stammer, E. Pisanty, T. Lamprou, P. Tzallas, M. Lewenstein, and M. F. Ciappina, Journal of Computational Electronics 20, 2111 (2021)

    2021

  19. [28]

    Lewenstein, M

    M. Lewenstein, M. F. Ciappina, E. Pisanty, J. Rivera- Dean, P. Stammer, T. Lamprou, and P. Tzallas, Nature Physics 17, 1104 (2021)

    2021

  20. [29]

    Dudovich, O

    N. Dudovich, O. Smirnova, J. Levesque, Y. Mairesse, M. Y. Ivanov, D. Villeneuve, and P. B. Corkum, Nature physics 2, 781 (2006)

    2006

  21. [30]

    For m = 0, g(2) N (0) = 3 takes the value of a squeezed vacuum state, see Fig

    represents an m-photon added squeezed vacuum state [41]. For m = 0, g(2) N (0) = 3 takes the value of a squeezed vacuum state, see Fig. 5(a). Further, the product of quadrature variances in Fig. 5(b) for m = 0 and θ = 0 gives 1/ 16, the minimum uncertainty. However, the maximu...

  22. [31]

    S. Yi, N. D. Klimkin, G. G. Brown, O. Smirnova, S. Patchkovskii, I. Babushkin, and M. Ivanov, Physical Review X 15, 011023 (2025)

    2025

  23. [32]

    Stammer, J

    P. Stammer, J. Rivera-Dean, A. S. Maxwell, T. Lamprou, J. Argüello-Luengo, P. Tzal- las, M. F. Ciappina, and M. Lewenstein, Physical Review Letters 132, 143603 (2024)

    2024

  24. [33]

    Even Tzur and O

    M. Even Tzur and O. Cohen, Light: Science & Applications 13, 41 (2024)

    2024

  25. [34]

    This term is positive and reduces squeezing, although minimum uncertainty is sustained

    a residual term ∝ | ζN |2 remains, even for m = 0 . This term is positive and reduces squeezing, although minimum uncertainty is sustained. Finally, due to mode mixing, the quadrature variances for m ⁄= 0 are different from a regular squeezed state, see blue line and red dots i...

  26. [37]

    Bertrand, H

    J. Bertrand, H. J. Wörner, H.-C. Bandulet, É. Bis- son, M. Spanner, J.-C. Kieffer, D. Villeneuve, and P. B. Corkum, Physical review letters 106, 023001 (2011)

    2011

  27. [38]

    D. N. Purschke, Á. Jiménez-Galán, T. Brabec, A. Y. Naumov, A. Staudte, D. M. Villeneuve, and G. Vampa, Physical Review A 108, L051103 (2023)

    2023

  28. [39]

    Brunel, Journal of the Optical Society of America B 7, 521 (1990)

    F. Brunel, Journal of the Optical Society of America B 7, 521 (1990)

    1990

  29. [40]

    or, potentially, by extending in-situ techniques to the single shot [29]. D. Projective measurement on QSHH mode N The analysis is performed for Eq. (

  30. [41]

    Vampa, C

    G. Vampa, C. McDonald, G. Orlando, D. Klug, 12 P. Corkum, and T. Brabec, Physical Review Letters 113, 073901 (2014)

    2014

  31. [43]

    Vampa, T

    G. Vampa, T. Hammond, N. Thiré, B. Schmidt, F. Lé- garé, C. McDonald, T. Brabec, and P. Corkum, Nature 522, 462 (2015)

    2015

  32. [44]

    Reshak, Z

    A. Reshak, Z. Alahmed, and S. Auluck, Solid state sci- ences 38, 138 (2014)

    2014

  33. [45]

    Sivis, M

    M. Sivis, M. Taucer, G. Vampa, K. Johnston, A. Staudte, A. Y. Naumov, D. Villeneuve, C. Ropers, and P. Corkum, Science 357, 303 (2017)

    2017

  34. [46]

    H. Liu, C. Guo, G. Vampa, J. L. Zhang, T. Sarmiento, M. Xiao, P. H. Bucksbaum, J. Vučković, S. Fan, and D. A. Reis, Nature Physics 14, 1006 (2018)

    2018

  35. [47]

    Vampa, B

    G. Vampa, B. Ghamsari, S. Siadat Mousavi, T. Ham- mond, A. Olivieri, E. Lisicka-Skrek, A. Y. Naumov, D. Villeneuve, A. Staudte, P. Berini, et al. , Nature Physics 13, 659 (2017)

    2017

  36. [48]

    C. E. Vollmer, C. Baune, A. Samblowski, T. Eberle, V. Händchen, J. Fiurášek, and R. Schnabel, Physical re- view letters 112, 073602 (2014)

    2014

  37. [49]

    O. Raz, O. Pedatzur, B. D. Bruner, and N. Dudovich, Nature Photonics 6, 170 (2012)

    2012

  38. [50]

    A. J. Uzan, G. Orenstein, Á. Jiménez-Galán, C. Mc- Donald, R. E. Silva, B. D. Bruner, N. D. Klimkin, V. Blanchet, T. Arusi-Parpar, M. Krüger, et al. , Nature Photonics 14, 183 (2020)

    2020

  39. [52]

    Schmidt, M

    M. Schmidt, M. Von Helversen, M. López, F. Gericke, E. Schlottmann, T. Heindel, S. Kück, S. Reitzenstein, and J. Beyer, Journal of Low Temperature Physics 193, 1243 (2018)

    2018

  40. [53]

    A. I. Lvovsky, Photonics: Scientific Foundations, Tech- nology and Applications 1, 121 (2015)

    2015

  41. [55]

    Guo, Y.-F

    L.-L. Guo, Y.-F. Yu, and Z.-M. Zhang, Optics Express 26, 29099 (2018)

    2018

  42. [56]

    S. B. Park, K. Kim, W. Cho, S. I. Hwang, I. Ivanov, C. H. Nam, and K. T. Kim, Optica 5, 402 (2018)

    2018

  43. [57]

    Sederberg, D

    S. Sederberg, D. Zimin, S. Keiber, F. Siegrist, M. S. Wis- mer, V. S. Yakovlev, I. Floss, C. Lemell, J. Burgdör- fer, M. Schultze, et al. , Nature communications 11, 430 (2020). arXiv:2505.22536v1 [quant-ph] 28 May 2025 Quantum engineering of high harmonic generation: suppleme...

    2020 arXiv

  44. [58]

    Gorlach, O

    A. Gorlach, O. Neufeld, N. Rivera, O. Cohen, and I. Kaminer, Nature Communications 11, 4598 (2020)

    2020

  45. [59]

    R. M. Wilcox, Journal of Mathematical Physics 8, 962 (1967)

    1967

  46. [60]

    Even Tzur, M

    M. Even Tzur, M. Birk, A. Gorlach, M. Krüger, I. Kaminer, and O. Cohen, Nature Photonics 17, 501 (2023)

    2023

  47. [61]

    Z. Xie, Z. Chen, H. Li, Q. Yan, H. Chen, X. Lin, I. Kaminer, O. D. Miller, and Y. Yang, Physical Review Letters 134, 043803 (2025)

    2025

  48. [62]

    Fan, Journal of Optics B: Quantum and Semiclassical Optics 5, R147 (2003)

    H.-Y. Fan, Journal of Optics B: Quantum and Semiclassical Optics 5, R147 (2003)

    2003

  49. [63]

    R. W. Boyd, Nonlinear optics (Academic press, 2020)

    2020

  50. [64]

    C. C. Gerry and P. L. Knight, Introductory quantum op- tics (Cambridge university press, 2023)

    2023

  51. [65]

    Agrawal and C

    G. Agrawal and C. Mehta, Journal of Mathematical Physics 18, 408 (1977)

    1977

  52. [66]

    X. Qiu, J. Huang, Z. Fu, and F. Jia, Results in Physics 43, 106100 (2022)

    2022

  53. [67]

    P. P. Rohde, W. Mauerer, and C. Silberhorn, New Journal of Physics 9, 91 (2007)

    2007

  54. [68]

    Lemieux, S

    S. Lemieux, S. A. Jalil, D. Purschke, N. Boroumand, D. Villeneuve, A. Naumov, T. Brabec, and G. Vampa, arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.05474 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  55. [69]

    S. Kun, J. Xiao-Hui, and J. Huan-Yu, Chinese Physics B 19, 064205 (2010)

    2010

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.