pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.05935 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-07 · ✦ hep-ph · physics.plasm-ph

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Monte-Carlo Event Generation for X-Ray Thomson Scattering Analysis

Uwe Hernandez Acosta , Thomas Gawne , Jan Vorberger , Hannah Bellenbaum , Anton Reinhard , Simeon Ehrig , Klaus Steiniger , Michael Bussmann
show 1 more author
Tobias Dornheim
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 19:24 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph physics.plasm-ph
keywords X-ray Thomson scatteringMonte Carlo event generationwarm dense matterdifferential cross section samplingspectrometer simulationevent-driven modelingkinematic information preservation
0
0 comments X

The pith

X-ray Thomson scattering signals can be built by sampling individual scattering events from the differential cross section and propagating them through a spectrometer simulation.

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

The paper presents a Monte Carlo event-generation method for interpreting X-ray Thomson scattering measurements in warm-dense-matter experiments. Instead of calculating complete spectra through repeated forward modeling, it draws discrete scattering events according to the underlying differential cross section and routes each event through a detector simulation. This keeps every event's full kinematic details intact and permits analysis that respects the actual experimental geometry without recomputing the entire spectrum each time. The authors show the approach works for non-resonant scattering in a controlled synthetic case and note that the same set of events can be reused for different instrument models. The technique is deliberately model-agnostic and draws on particle-physics event generators to reduce redundant computation.

Core claim

The central discovery is that sampling scattering events directly from the differential cross section and feeding them through a spectrometer simulation produces a statistically consistent XRTS signal representation that retains complete kinematic information, supports geometry-aware analysis, and decouples the expensive event-generation step from subsequent detector-level processing.

What carries the argument

Event-driven Monte Carlo sampling of scattering events from the differential cross section, followed by propagation through a spectrometer simulation.

If this is right

  • Sampled events can be reused across multiple detector models or analysis pipelines without regenerating the microscopic scattering data.
  • Computational cost drops for repeated evaluations because only the detector simulation needs to be rerun.
  • Geometry-dependent effects can be studied directly by changing how events are propagated rather than by re-deriving spectra.
  • The framework remains compatible with any microscopic model that supplies a differential cross section.
  • Inference tasks gain access to the full kinematic information carried by each individual event.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same sampled events could later be filtered or weighted to explore how different resonant or collective contributions would appear in the measured signal.
  • Uncertainty propagation becomes more straightforward because statistical fluctuations are carried explicitly by the finite event sample rather than by analytic approximations.
  • Combining this generator with other diagnostics, such as X-ray diffraction or emission spectroscopy, would require only a common event list and separate detector modules.

Load-bearing premise

That drawing events from the differential cross section and passing them through the spectrometer simulation will automatically maintain physical consistency and correct statistics for real experimental geometries and for resonant or collective scattering effects.

What would settle it

A side-by-side comparison in which the binned energy-angle spectrum obtained from the event-sampled events differs measurably from the spectrum produced by a conventional forward model under identical input conditions and geometry.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.05935 by Anton Reinhard, Hannah Bellenbaum, Jan Vorberger, Klaus Steiniger, Michael Bussmann, Simeon Ehrig, Thomas Gawne, Tobias Dornheim, Uwe Hernandez Acosta.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic overview of the XRTS probing workflow, where the incident X-ray beam configuration and pumped-sample model are combined to generate scattering events imprinting the probing information, which are propagated through the detector simulation framework. Eventually, the synthetic detector image is compared to experimental data. In a simplified picture, a typical pump-probe experiment for WDM consists … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: exhibits the resulting differential cross section (1) for the interacting electron gas as a function of the incident electron energy Ekin and the cosine of the scattering angle cos θ for several 1Unless stated otherwise, we employ natural units with ℏ = c = kB = 1, such that the dimension of all quantities is expressed in terms of an energy scale, e.g., [kF ] = [EF ] = [T] = [S(ω, q)] = eV, and [ne] = eV3 … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Generated events for XRTS off an interacting electron gas projected onto the plane span by the the cosine of the scattering angle cos θ and the energy ω ′ of the scattered photon, for the electron density ne = 1023cm−3 and electron temperatures of T = 5, 10, 20, and 40eV. The central energy of the incident photon is ω ref X = 10keV with a spectral width of ∆ωX = 0.1 keV. temperatures. At low temperatures, … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Same as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Same as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Detector image produced by HEART with a setup including a mosaic HAPG crystal with a radius of curvature ROC = 80 mm and thickness Tc = 0.04 mm combined with a Jungfrau detector. The covered window for the scattering angle is θ = 9.6 ◦ − 11.75◦. 3.5 Performance Analysis and Break-Even Considerations Performance analysis of the event-generation stage is critical for its applicability, and therefore for the … view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Efficiency of the acceptence-rejection algorithm (7) computed based on 107 events generated with the same setup as used in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

A key diagnostic in warm-dense matter (WDM) experiments is X-ray Thomson scattering (XRTS), but its interpretation is often limited by complex instrument effects and the high computationally expensive combinations of microscopic models with detector simulations. We present a proof-of-principle implementation of an event-driven approach to XRTS modelling, inspired by particle physics event-generators. Instead of computing the spectra via forward models, individual scattering events are sampled from the differential cross section and sent through a spectrometer simulation. This provides a statistically consistent representation that preserves full kinematic information and enables flexible and geometry-aware analysis. We demonstrate the feasibility and physical consistency of the method for non-resonant XRTS in a synthetic setup. By decoupling event generation from detector-level analysis, the framework allows efficient reuse of the sampled events and reduces computational overhead associated with repeated evaluations. The method is model-agnostic and establishes a new connection between particle-physics event generation techniques and WDM diagnostics, providing a scalable foundation for advanced XRTS analysis and inference.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper presents a proof-of-principle implementation of an event-driven Monte-Carlo approach to X-ray Thomson scattering (XRTS) modeling for warm-dense matter diagnostics. Individual scattering events are sampled from the differential cross section and propagated through a spectrometer simulation, demonstrated on synthetic non-resonant data. The method is described as model-agnostic, preserving full kinematic information, enabling geometry-aware analysis, and allowing efficient reuse of events to reduce computational overhead compared to repeated forward-model evaluations.

Significance. If the statistical consistency and physical accuracy are established, the framework could offer a scalable, flexible alternative to traditional XRTS forward modeling by decoupling event generation from detector analysis and bridging techniques from particle-physics event generators to WDM experiments. This may facilitate advanced inference with complex instrument effects while maintaining kinematic fidelity.

major comments (1)
  1. The demonstration of feasibility and physical consistency (synthetic non-resonant setup) provides no quantitative validation metrics, error analysis, or direct comparisons against established forward models or analytic spectra. This absence makes it impossible to verify the claimed statistical consistency or assess accuracy for the sampled events.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive review and for recognizing the potential of the event-driven Monte-Carlo framework. We address the single major comment below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate quantitative validation as requested.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The demonstration of feasibility and physical consistency (synthetic non-resonant setup) provides no quantitative validation metrics, error analysis, or direct comparisons against established forward models or analytic spectra. This absence makes it impossible to verify the claimed statistical consistency or assess accuracy for the sampled events.

    Authors: We agree that the present proof-of-principle demonstration lacks the quantitative metrics, error analysis, and direct comparisons needed for rigorous verification. In the revised manuscript we will add: (i) direct numerical comparisons of the Monte-Carlo-generated spectra against the analytic non-resonant differential cross-section for the same synthetic geometry, including integrated intensity ratios and point-wise residuals; (ii) statistical consistency tests (e.g., chi-squared per degree of freedom and Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests on binned spectra); and (iii) an error budget quantifying sampling variance and propagation through the spectrometer simulation. These additions will allow readers to assess the accuracy and statistical fidelity of the sampled events. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The manuscript describes a proof-of-principle Monte-Carlo sampling framework that generates individual XRTS scattering events directly from the differential cross section and routes them through a spectrometer model. This construction is a straightforward adaptation of standard event-generator techniques; the output spectra are not defined in terms of any fitted parameters or prior results from the same work. No equations, self-citations, or uniqueness claims are presented that would reduce the central method to its own inputs by construction. The demonstration is limited to non-resonant synthetic cases and remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review provides no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; the central claim rests on the unstated assumption that differential-cross-section sampling plus detector propagation yields statistically equivalent results to full forward modeling.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5498 in / 1186 out tokens · 46469 ms · 2026-05-10T19:24:03.020127+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Model-free interpretation of X-ray Thomson scattering measurements

    physics.plasm-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 2.0

    The paper reviews the use of the imaginary-time correlation function to extract temperature, normalization, and Rayleigh weight from XRTS spectra without model dependence.

  2. Overview of X-ray Thomson scattering measurements of extreme states of matter

    physics.plasm-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 2.0

    XRTS has become a leading diagnostic for extreme states of matter, and this review compiles prior experiments, analysis methods, and future directions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Theoretical model of x-ray scattering as a dense matter probe

    Gregori G, Glenzer SH, Rozmus W, Lee R, Landen O. Theoretical model of x-ray scattering as a dense matter probe. Physical Review E. 2003;67(2):026412

    2003

  2. [2]

    X-ray Thomson scattering in high energy density plasmas

    Glenzer SH, Redmer R. X-ray Thomson scattering in high energy density plasmas. Reviews of Modern Physics. 2009;81(4):1625-63

    2009

  3. [3]

    Plasma scattering of electromagnetic radiation: theory and measurement techniques

    Sheffield J, Froula D, Glenzer SH, Luhmann Jr NC. Plasma scattering of electromagnetic radiation: theory and measurement techniques. Academic press; 2010

    2010

  4. [4]

    Experimental methods for warm dense matter research

    Falk K. Experimental methods for warm dense matter research. High Power Laser Science and Engineering. 2018;6:e59

    2018

  5. [5]

    Frontiers and challenges in warm dense matter

    Graziani F, Desjarlais MP, Redmer R, Trickey SB. Frontiers and challenges in warm dense matter. vol. 96. Springer Science & Business; 2014

    2014

  6. [6]

    Roadmap for warm dense matter physics

    Vorberger J, Graziani F, Riley D, Baczewski AD, Baraffe I, Bethkenhagen M, et al. Roadmap for warm dense matter physics. arXiv preprint arXiv:250502494. 2025

    2025

  7. [7]

    Inertial-confinement fusion with lasers

    Betti R, Hurricane O. Inertial-confinement fusion with lasers. Nature Physics. 2016;12(5):435- 48

    2016

  8. [8]

    Physics principles of inertial confinement fusion and US program overview

    Hurricane OA, Patel P, Betti R, Froula DH, Regan S, Slutz SA, et al. Physics principles of inertial confinement fusion and US program overview. Reviews of Modern Physics. 2023;95(2):025005

    2023

  9. [9]

    Present understanding of ignition and gain using indirect-drive inertial confinement fusion target designs on the US National Ignition Facility

    Hurricane O, Allen A, Bachmann B, Baker K, Baxamusa S, Bhandarkar S, et al. Present understanding of ignition and gain using indirect-drive inertial confinement fusion target designs on the US National Ignition Facility. Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion. 2024;67(1):015019

    2024

  10. [10]

    Dense plasmas in astrophysics: from giant planets to neutron stars

    Chabrier G, Saumon D, Potekhin A. Dense plasmas in astrophysics: from giant planets to neutron stars. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General. 2006;39(17):4411

    2006

  11. [11]

    Understanding Jupiter’s interior

    Militzer B, Soubiran F, Wahl SM, Hubbard W. Understanding Jupiter’s interior. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets. 2016;121(9):1552-72

    2016

  12. [12]

    Understanding dense hydrogen at planetary conditions

    Helled R, Mazzola G, Redmer R. Understanding dense hydrogen at planetary conditions. Nature Reviews Physics. 2020;2(10):562-74

    2020

  13. [13]

    Current challenges in the physics of white dwarf stars

    Saumon D, Blouin S, Tremblay PE. Current challenges in the physics of white dwarf stars. Physics Reports. 2022;988:1-63

    2022

  14. [14]

    Simulating x-ray Thomson scattering signals from high-density, millimetre-scale plasmas at the National Ignition Facility

    Chapman DA, Kraus D, Kritcher AL, Bachmann B, Collins GW, Falcone RW, et al. Simulating x-ray Thomson scattering signals from high-density, millimetre-scale plasmas at the National Ignition Facility. Physics of Plasmas. 2014 08;21(8):082709

    2014

  15. [15]

    Strong geometry dependence of the x-ray Thomson scattering spectrum in single crystal silicon

    Gawne T, Moldabekov ZA, Humphries OS, Appel K, Baehtz C, Bouffetier V, et al. Strong geometry dependence of the x-ray Thomson scattering spectrum in single crystal silicon. Elec- tronic Structure. 2025;7(2):025002. 12 IOP PublishingJournalvv(yyyy) aaaaaa Authoret al

    2025

  16. [16]

    A Composite Ansatz for Calculation of Dynamical Structure Factor

    Zhang Y, Mo C, Zhang P, Kang W. A Composite Ansatz for Calculation of Dynamical Structure Factor. Chinese Physics Letters. 2024 jan;41(1):017801

    2024

  17. [17]

    Unravel- ing electronic correlations in warm dense quantum plasmas

    Dornheim T, D¨ oppner T, Tolias P, B¨ ohme MP, Fletcher LB, Gawne T, et al. Unravel- ing electronic correlations in warm dense quantum plasmas. Nature Communications. 2025 Jun;16(1):5103

    2025

  18. [18]

    Ab initio Path Integral Monte Carlo Results for the Dynamic Structure Factor of Correlated Electrons: From the Electron Liquid to Warm Dense Matter

    Dornheim T, Groth S, Vorberger J, Bonitz M. Ab initio Path Integral Monte Carlo Results for the Dynamic Structure Factor of Correlated Electrons: From the Electron Liquid to Warm Dense Matter. Phys Rev Lett. 2018;121:255001

    2018

  19. [19]

    X-ray Thomson Scattering in Warm Dense Matter without the Chihara Decomposition

    Baczewski AD, Shulenburger L, Desjarlais MP, Hansen SB, Magyar RJ. X-ray Thomson Scattering in Warm Dense Matter without the Chihara Decomposition. Phys Rev Lett. 2016;116:115004

    2016

  20. [20]

    X-ray Thomson scattering spectra from density functional theory molecular dynamics simulations based on a modified Chihara formula

    Sch¨ orner M, Bethkenhagen M, D¨ oppner T, Kraus D, Fletcher LB, Glenzer SH, et al. X-ray Thomson scattering spectra from density functional theory molecular dynamics simulations based on a modified Chihara formula. Phys Rev E. 2023 Jun;107:065207

    2023

  21. [21]

    Applying the Liouville–Lanczos method of time-dependent density-functional theory to warm dense matter

    Moldabekov ZA, Schwalbe S, Gawne T, Preston TR, Vorberger J, Dornheim T. Applying the Liouville–Lanczos method of time-dependent density-functional theory to warm dense matter. Matter and Radiation at Extremes. 2025 05;10(4):047601

    2025

  22. [22]

    Dynamical structure factors of warm dense matter from time-dependent orbital- free and mixed-stochastic-deterministic density functional theory

    White AJ. Dynamical structure factors of warm dense matter from time-dependent orbital- free and mixed-stochastic-deterministic density functional theory. Electronic Structure. 2025 feb;7(1):014001

    2025

  23. [23]

    General-purpose event generators for LHC physics

    Buckley A, Butterworth J, Gieseke S, Grellscheid D, H¨ oche S, Hoeth H, et al. General-purpose event generators for LHC physics. Physics Reports. 2011;504(5):145-233

    2011

  24. [24]

    MCNP-a general Monte Carlo code for neutron and photon transport

    Forster R, Godfrey T. MCNP-a general Monte Carlo code for neutron and photon transport. In: Monte-Carlo Methods and Applications in Neutronics, Photonics and Statistical Physics: Proceedings of the Joint Los Alamos National Laboratory-Commissariat ` a l’Energie Atomique Meeting Held at Cadarache Castle, Provence, France April 22–26, 1985. Springer; 2006. p. 33-55

    1985

  25. [25]

    Geant4—a sim- ulation toolkit

    Agostinelli S, Allison J, Amako Ka, Apostolakis J, Araujo H, Arce P, et al. Geant4—a sim- ulation toolkit. Nuclear instruments and methods in physics research section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment. 2003;506(3):250-303

    2003

  26. [26]

    The OpenMC monte carlo particle transport code

    Romano PK, Forget B. The OpenMC monte carlo particle transport code. Annals of Nuclear Energy. 2013;51:274-81

    2013

  27. [27]

    Simulation of X-ray scattering diagnostics in multi-dimensional plasma

    Golovkin I, MacFarlane JJ, Woodruff P, Hall I, Gregori G, Bailey J, et al. Simulation of X-ray scattering diagnostics in multi-dimensional plasma. High Energy Density Physics. 2013;9(3):510- 5

    2013

  28. [28]

    Investigating the impact of intermediate-mode perturbations on diagnosing plasma conditions in DT cryogenic implo- sions via synthetic x-ray Thomson scattering

    Poole H, Cao D, Epstein R, Golovkin I, Goncharov VN, Hu SX, et al. Investigating the impact of intermediate-mode perturbations on diagnosing plasma conditions in DT cryogenic implo- sions via synthetic x-ray Thomson scattering. Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion. 2024 dec;67(1):015034

    2024

  29. [29]

    Ob- serving the onset of pressure-driven K-shell delocalization

    D¨ oppner T, Bethkenhagen M, Kraus D, Neumayer P, Chapman DA, Bachmann B, et al. Ob- serving the onset of pressure-driven K-shell delocalization. Nature. 2023 May

    2023

  30. [30]

    The colliding planar shocks platform to study warm dense matter at the National Ignition Facility

    MacDonald MJ, Di Stefano CA, Doeppner T, Fletcher L, Flippo KA, Kalantar D, et al. The colliding planar shocks platform to study warm dense matter at the National Ignition Facility. Physics of Plasmas. 2023;30(6)

    2023

  31. [31]

    Experimen- tal Evidence for the Breakdown of Uniform-Electron-Gas Models in Warm Dense Aluminium

    Bespalov DS, Zastrau U, Moldabekov ZA, Gawne T, Dornheim T, Meshhal M, et al.. Experimen- tal Evidence for the Breakdown of Uniform-Electron-Gas Models in Warm Dense Aluminium

  32. [32]

    Available from:https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.10107

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  33. [33]

    Ultrahigh resolution x-ray Thomson scattering measurements at the European X-ray Free Electron Laser

    Gawne T, Moldabekov ZA, Humphries OS, Appel K, Baehtz C, Bouffetier V, et al. Ultrahigh resolution x-ray Thomson scattering measurements at the European X-ray Free Electron Laser. Physical Review B. 2024;109(24):L241112. 13 IOP PublishingJournalvv(yyyy) aaaaaa Authoret al

    2024

  34. [34]

    The matter in extreme conditions instrument at the Linac coherent light source

    Nagler B, Arnold B, Bouchard G, Boyce RF, Boyce RM, Callen A, et al. The matter in extreme conditions instrument at the Linac coherent light source. Synchrotron Radiation. 2015;22(3):520- 5

    2015

  35. [35]

    Matter under extreme conditions experiments at the Linac Coherent Light Source

    Glenzer S, Fletcher L, Galtier E, Nagler B, Alonso-Mori R, Barbrel B, et al. Matter under extreme conditions experiments at the Linac Coherent Light Source. Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics. 2016;49(9):092001

    2016

  36. [36]

    Design of inertial fusion implosions reaching the burning plasma regime

    Kritcher A, Young C, Robey H, Weber C, Zylstra A, Hurricane O, et al. Design of inertial fusion implosions reaching the burning plasma regime. Nature Physics. 2022;18(3):251-8

    2022

  37. [37]

    Design and performance characterisation of the HAPG von H´ amos spectrometer at the high energy density instrument of the European XFEL

    Preston T, G¨ ode S, Schwinkendorf JP, Appel K, Brambrink E, Cerantola V, et al. Design and performance characterisation of the HAPG von H´ amos spectrometer at the high energy density instrument of the European XFEL. Journal of Instrumentation. 2020;15(11):P11033-3

    2020

  38. [38]

    Effects of mosaic crystal instrument functions on x-ray Thomson scattering diagnostics

    Gawne T, Bellenbaum H, Fletcher LB, Appel K, Baehtz C, Bouffetier V, et al. Effects of mosaic crystal instrument functions on x-ray Thomson scattering diagnostics. Journal of Applied Physics. 2024 09;136(10):105902

    2024

  39. [39]

    Physics of shock waves and high-temperature hydrodynamic phe- nomena

    Zel’Dovich YB, Raizer YP. Physics of shock waves and high-temperature hydrodynamic phe- nomena. Courier Corporation; 2002

    2002

  40. [40]

    The equations of radiation hydrodynamics

    Pomraning GC. The equations of radiation hydrodynamics. Courier Corporation; 2005

    2005

  41. [41]

    Foundations of radiation hydrodynamics

    Mihalas D, Mihalas BW. Foundations of radiation hydrodynamics. Courier Corporation; 2013

    2013

  42. [42]

    Con- temporary particle-in-cell approach to laser-plasma modelling

    Arber TD, Bennett K, Brady CS, Lawrence-Douglas A, Ramsay MG, Sircombe NJ, et al. Con- temporary particle-in-cell approach to laser-plasma modelling. Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion. 2015 sep;57(11):113001

    2015

  43. [43]

    Plasma physics via computer simulation

    Birdsall CK, Langdon AB. Plasma physics via computer simulation. CRC press; 2018

    2018

  44. [44]

    Bayesian inference and the analytic continuation of imaginary-time quantum Monte Carlo data

    Jarrell M, Gubernatis JE. Bayesian inference and the analytic continuation of imaginary-time quantum Monte Carlo data. Physics Reports. 1996;269(3):133-95

    1996

  45. [45]

    PyLIT: Reformulation and implementation of the analytic continuation problem using kernel representation methods

    Benedix Robles A, Hofmann PA, Chuna T, Dornheim T, Hecht M. PyLIT: Reformulation and implementation of the analytic continuation problem using kernel representation methods. Computer Physics Communications. 2026;319:109904

    2026

  46. [46]

    The noiseless limit and improved-prior limit 54 of the maximum entropy method and their implica- tions for the analytic continuation problem,

    Chuna T, Barnfield N, Hamann P, Schwalbe S, Friedlander MP, Dornheim T. The noiseless limit and improved-prior limit of the maximum entropy method and their implications for the analytic continuation problem; 2025. Available from:https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.06915

    work page arXiv 2025

  47. [47]

    Various techniques used in connection with random digits

    Von Neumann J. Various techniques used in connection with random digits. John von Neumann, Collected Works. 1963;5:768-70

    1963

  48. [48]

    Von Neumann’s comparison method for random sampling from the normal and other distributions

    Forsythe GE. Von Neumann’s comparison method for random sampling from the normal and other distributions. Mathematics of Computation. 1972;26(120):817-26

    1972

  49. [49]

    Monte Carlo theory and practice

    James F. Monte Carlo theory and practice. Reports on progress in Physics. 1980;43(9):1145

    1980

  50. [50]

    Nonuniform random variate generation

    Devroye L. Nonuniform random variate generation. Handbooks in operations research and management science. 2006;13:83-121

    2006

  51. [51]

    Monte carlo and quasi-monte carlo sampling

    Lemieux C. Monte carlo and quasi-monte carlo sampling. Springer Series in Statistics. Springer New York, NY; 2009

    2009

  52. [52]

    Handbook of monte carlo methods

    Kroese DP, Taimre T, Botev ZI. Handbook of monte carlo methods. John Wiley & Sons; 2013

    2013

  53. [53]

    Simulation and the Monte Carlo method

    Rubinstein RY, Kroese DP. Simulation and the Monte Carlo method. John Wiley & Sons; 2016

    2016

  54. [54]

    A New Algorithm for Adaptive Multidimensional Integration

    Lepage GP. A New Algorithm for Adaptive Multidimensional Integration. J Comput Phys. 1978;27:192

    1978

  55. [55]

    Vegas revisited: Adaptive Monte Carlo integration beyond factorization

    Ohl T. Vegas revisited: Adaptive Monte Carlo integration beyond factorization. Comput Phys Commun. 1999;120:13-9. 14 IOP PublishingJournalvv(yyyy) aaaaaa Authoret al

    1999

  56. [56]

    Adaptive multidimensional integration: VEGAS enhanced

    Lepage GP. Adaptive multidimensional integration: VEGAS enhanced. J Comput Phys. 2021;439:110386

    2021

  57. [57]

    Survey Sampling

    Kish L. Survey Sampling. Wiley Classics Library. John Wiley & Sons; 1995

    1995

  58. [58]

    Accelerating Monte Carlo event generation– rejection sampling using neural network event-weight estimates

    Danziger K, Janßen T, Schumann S, Siegert F. Accelerating Monte Carlo event generation– rejection sampling using neural network event-weight estimates. SciPost Physics. 2022;12(5):164

    2022

  59. [59]

    HEART: A new X-ray tracing code for mosaic crystal spectrometers

    Gawne T, Schwalbe S, Chuna T, Acosta UH, Preston TR, Dornheim T. HEART: A new X-ray tracing code for mosaic crystal spectrometers. Computer Physics Communications. 2025:109878

    2025

  60. [60]

    Julia: A fresh approach to numerical computing

    Bezanson J, Edelman A, Karpinski S, Shah VB. Julia: A fresh approach to numerical computing. SIAM Review. 2017;59(1):65-98

    2017

  61. [61]

    XRTSProbing.jl (Version v0.0.1); 2026

    Uwe Hernandez Acosta. XRTSProbing.jl (Version v0.0.1); 2026. Available from:https:// github.com/JuliaXRTS/XRTSProbing.jl

    2026

  62. [62]

    ElectronicStructureModels.jl (Version v0.2.1); 2025-12-19

    Hernandez Acosta U. ElectronicStructureModels.jl (Version v0.2.1); 2025-12-19. Available from: https://github.com/JuliaXRTS/ElectronicStructureModels.jl

    2025

  63. [63]

    QuantumElectrody- namics.jl (Version v0.4.0); 2026-03-30

    Hernandez Acosta U, Reinhard A, Ehrig S, Steiniger K, Bussmann M. QuantumElectrody- namics.jl (Version v0.4.0); 2026-03-30. http://doi.org/10.14278/rodare.4584. Available from: https://github.com/QEDjl-project/QuantumElectrodynamics.jl

    work page doi:10.14278/rodare.4584 2026

  64. [64]

    The uniform electron gas at warm dense matter conditions

    Dornheim T, Groth S, Bonitz M. The uniform electron gas at warm dense matter conditions. Phys Reports. 2018;744:1-86

    2018

  65. [65]

    The fluctuation-dissipation theorem

    Kubo R. The fluctuation-dissipation theorem. Reports on progress in physics. 1966;29(1):255- 84

    1966

  66. [66]

    CODATA recommended values of the fundamental physical constants: 2022

    Mohr PJ, Newell DB, Taylor BN, Tiesinga E. CODATA recommended values of the fundamental physical constants: 2022. Reviews of Modern Physics. 2025;97(2):025002

    2022

  67. [67]

    Quantum theory of the electron liquid

    Giuliani G, Vignale G. Quantum theory of the electron liquid. Cambridge university press; 2008

    2008

  68. [68]

    Char- acterization results of the JUNGFRAU full scale readout ASIC

    Mozzanica A, Bergamaschi A, Brueckner M, Cartier S, Dinapoli R, Greiffenberg D, et al. Char- acterization results of the JUNGFRAU full scale readout ASIC. Journal of Instrumentation. 2016;11(02):C02047-7

    2016

  69. [69]

    A conceptual model for ray tracing calculations with mosaic crystals

    Sanchez del Rio M, Bernstorff S, Savoia A, Cerrina F. A conceptual model for ray tracing calculations with mosaic crystals. Review of scientific instruments. 1992;63(1):932-5

    1992

  70. [70]

    Focal aberra- tions of large-aperture HOPG von-H` amos x-ray spectrometers

    Zastrau U, Brown C, D¨ oppner T, Glenzer S, Gregori G, Lee H, et al. Focal aberra- tions of large-aperture HOPG von-H` amos x-ray spectrometers. Journal of Instrumentation. 2012;7(09):P09015-5

    2012

  71. [71]

    Inverse problem in- stabilities in large-scale modeling of matter in extreme conditions

    Kasim MF, Galligan TP, Topp-Mugglestone J, Gregori G, Vinko SM. Inverse problem in- stabilities in large-scale modeling of matter in extreme conditions. Physics of Plasmas. 2019 11;26(11):112706

    2019

  72. [72]

    On the properties of a gas of charged particles

    Lindhard J. On the properties of a gas of charged particles. Kgl Danske Videnskab Selskab Mat-Fys Medd. 1953;28

    1953

  73. [73]

    Efficient technique to evaluate the Lindhard dielectric function

    Ancarani LU, Jouin H. Efficient technique to evaluate the Lindhard dielectric function. The European Physical Journal Plus. 2016;131(4):114. 15

    2016