Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 38 references

Terahertz-based longitudinal phase space diagnostics of laser wakefield accelerated electron beams

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For laser-wakefield electron bunches compressed in a double-bend achromat, the final femtosecond bunch duration is set by which portion of the nonlinear longitudinal phase space the energy window transmits, not just by first-order…

desk verdict A clean experimental demonstration that THz-TDC plus a dipole can resolve the C-shaped longitudinal phase space of DBA-compressed LWFA bunches, and that the measured LPS can guide energy-window tuning to control final bunch duration. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.08586 v1 pith:RSCUSYXN submitted 2026-08-09 physics.acc-ph physics.plasm-ph

Zhihao Chen , Yu Fang , Ran Li , Xiancong Yang , Tianliang Zhang , Jianfei Hua , Fei Li , Wei Lu This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.acc-phphysics.plasm-ph
keywords terahertzstreakingtransversedeflectingcavitylaserwakefieldaccelerationlongitudinalphasespacedouble-bendachromatbunchcompressionfemtosecondelectronbeamsultrafastdiffraction
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

Laser wakefield accelerators produce femtosecond electron bunches, but the injection-induced energy spread makes their compression sensitive to nonlinear transport, so the final duration depends on which slice of the energy–time phase space survives. This paper builds a terahertz transverse-deflecting cavity plus dipole-magnet diagnostic that reconstructs that longitudinal phase space directly, resolving a C-shaped distribution caused by second-order transport in a double-bend achromat compressor. Using the measured phase space as a map, the authors show that both the central energy and the width of the transmitted energy window set the final bunch length: moving the window center 42 keV lower at fixed spread increases the RMS bunch length from 26 fs to 42 fs, and widening the spread from 2.0% to 4.4% around 4.553 MeV increases it from 27 fs to 44 fs. The point is that optimization is not simply setting the first-order compression term to zero; it requires centering the transmitted window in a low-slope region of the nonlinear phase space.

What carries the argument

The central object is the longitudinal phase space (LPS), the joint time–energy distribution of the bunch, reconstructed by combining a terahertz transverse-deflecting cavity (THz-TDC) with a dipole magnet: the THz field streaks the bunch vertically with calibrated strength $K\approx36.2\,\mu\mathrm{rad}/\mathrm{fs}$, and the dipole disperses energy horizontally. The temporal resolving power is $r_t=\sigma_{y0}/(K L_d)$ with $L_d\approx2.97\,\mathrm{m}$, giving 1.8 fs; the energy resolution is $r_E=E_0\sigma_{x0}/D_x$, giving 6.0 keV. The C-shaped LPS is the signature of the second-order transport coefficient $T_{566}$: the local time–energy slope is $\partial z/\partial\delta_0=R_{56}+2T_{566}\delta_0$, so different energy windows view regions of different slope. An aperture in the DBA's dispersive section selects the energy-window center and opening, which is the control the measurements exercise.

What would settle it

Measure the streaking curve by scanning a reference electron bunch much shorter than 26 fs across the full THz delay range and fit it beyond a straight line; if the fitted slope changes by more than the stated $\sim0.2\,\mathrm{fs}$ temporal-resolution uncertainty over the 26–44 fs span, re-extract the bunch lengths with the nonlinear calibration and check whether the 26 fs to 42 fs trend survives.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim, stated the way the authors would put it, is that the final duration of a double-bend-achromat-compressed laser wakefield electron bunch is set by the location and width of the transmitted energy window inside the nonlinear longitudinal phase space, and that a terahertz transverse-deflecting cavity combined with a dipole magnet can measure that phase space well enough to act as an optimization guide. Experimentally, the diagnostic resolves the C-shaped LPS with 1.8 fs temporal resolution and 6.0 keV energy resolution at approximately 4.55 MeV. With comparable energy spreads of about 2.9%, moving the window center from 4.574 MeV to 4.532 MeV increases the RMS bunch length from 26±3 fs to 42±5 fs; with the center near 4.553 MeV, increasing the FWHM spread from 2.0% to 4.4% increases it from 27±3 fs to 44±6 fs. The authors conclude that matching the central energy to a low-slope region of the LPS and controlling the spread are both required for short-bunch operation, and that the measured C-shape provides a direct experimental basis for higher-order transport correction.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the THz streaking strength $K\approx36.2\,\mu\mathrm{rad}/\mathrm{fs}$, calibrated from the linear response at the zero-crossing, remains linear across the whole 26–44 fs bunch duration and that the unstreaked vertical beam size can be subtracted in quadrature; significant THz field curvature over the bunch, or a window-dependent change in beam size, would bias the absolute bunch lengths and the reported trend.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The reconstructed LPS can be used directly as a tuning map: aperture position sets the local time–energy slope and aperture opening sets how much curved phase space is included.
  • Achieving the shortest bunch requires centering the transmitted energy window near the LPS inflection point, where $\partial z/\partial\delta_0\approx0$, rather than only setting $R_{56}=0$.
  • The measured C-shaped LPS gives an experimental target for $T_{566}$ compensation, for example with sextupoles in the dispersive section, with the diagnostic in place to verify the result.
  • Energy-spread control becomes a quantitative lever on bunch duration: a 2.4% widening of the FWHM spread near 4.55 MeV costs roughly 17 fs of RMS duration in this beamline.
  • At the demonstrated 1.8 fs resolution, the diagnostic is fast enough to support laser-wakefield-driven ultrafast electron diffraction aiming at sub-10 fs temporal resolution.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper's measurements, the same LPS-guided aperture logic should transfer to other second-order-dominated compressors such as chicanes and alpha magnets, because the local-slope criterion is geometric rather than specific to the DBA.
  • A testable extension is to stitch the window-resolved LPS snapshots into one full-energy-range map, which would expose the complete chirp and let future linearizer settings be set from data rather than from simulation.
  • The absolute 26–44 fs scale depends on the unquantified THz-field curvature; if curvature is significant, absolute durations could shift while the ordering of the six cases, which follows the LPS slope, could still hold.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This manuscript reports a terahertz transverse-deflecting cavity (THz-TDC) combined with a dipole magnet to reconstruct the longitudinal phase space (LPS) of laser-wakefield-accelerated electron bunches after double-bend-achromat (DBA) compression. The authors calibrate the streaking strength K≈36.2 μrad/fs, quote a temporal resolving power of 1.8 fs and an energy resolution of 6.0 keV, and measure a C-shaped LPS. For comparable energy spreads, moving the transmitted energy-window center from 4.574 to 4.532 MeV increases the RMS bunch length from 26±3 to 42±5 fs, and with the center near 4.553 MeV increasing the energy spread from 2.0% to 4.4% increases the length from 27±3 to 44±6 fs. The paper interprets these trends as resulting from the position and width of the energy window within a nonlinear LPS and proposes the measurement as a guide for optimizing DBA-compressed LWFA beams.

Significance. If the measured trends are unbiased, the paper is a valuable demonstration of direct femtosecond-scale LPS characterization of LWFA beams under nonlinear transport, with explicit resolution calibrations and uncertainties. The endpoint separations (approximately 2.7σ and 2.5σ) support the qualitative conclusions, and the transport interpretation via z=z0+R56δ0+T566δ0^2 is not fitted to the data, so the main observation is a direct measurement rather than a model-dependent inversion. The main risk is the unverified linearity of the THz streaking over the full 26–44 fs bunch range, which is load-bearing for the reported absolute lengths and trend.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III.B, Eq. (5), Fig. 4] The temporal calibration assumes that the THz streaking field is linear over the full temporal span of the bunch, but only a centroid-vs-delay scan near the zero-crossing is reported. Such a scan is insensitive to even-order nonlinearities, which leave the centroid unchanged but contribute to the second moment of the streaked profile. Since the reported bunch lengths extend to 44 fs RMS and the conversion uses t=y/(K L_d) with K measured at the zero-crossing, a modest field curvature could bias the inferred lengths by an amount that grows with bunch duration and could compress or exaggerate the reported 16–17 fs trends. The paper should quantify the field nonlinearity over ±44 fs or provide an independent bunch-length validation.
  2. [Section III.C, Table I] The extraction of RMS bunch lengths assumes that the unstreaked vertical beam size σ_y0=193±21 μm is the same for all energy-window conditions and can be subtracted in quadrature. The aperture position and opening affect the horizontal phase space and could in principle modify the beam size or its correlation at the THz-TDC; the paper reports only a single σ_y0. Reporting the unstreaked vertical size for each of the six cases, or an upper bound on its variation, would strengthen the claim that the bunch-length differences are due to longitudinal rather than transverse effects.
  3. [Sections II.B and III.C] The numerical simulations are presented as reproducing the nonlinear LPS evolution, but the simulation inputs (initial 6% FWHM energy spread, 10 fs RMS bunch length, 5 fC) are stated without a quantitative comparison to the measured LPS or to the energy-window trends. Because these inputs are free parameters rather than being fitted to the data, the simulations currently serve as illustration; the paper's central experimental conclusion does not depend on them, but the claim of reproduction should be substantiated or softened.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Table I] Adjacent cases (b vs c and e vs f) overlap within their quoted uncertainties; the text should explicitly report the significance of the endpoint comparisons rather than describing an 'overall increasing trend.'
  2. [Abstract and Section I] The acronym LWFA is typeset as 'L WF A' in several places; please ensure consistent spacing in the final version.
  3. [Equations (1) and (3)] Equation (1) uses R_{56,prop} and R_{56,comp}, while Eq. (3) writes R56 as a single expression; a brief statement of the sign convention would improve readability.
  4. [Section III.A, Eq. (4)] The estimate of the peak THz field uses the focal spot area A, but the relation between the measured beam waist radius of approximately 1 mm and the effective area used in Eq. (4) should be stated explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central results are direct measurements with independently calibrated streaking; the few self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central results are direct measurements rather than model-derived predictions. Bunch lengths are obtained from the streaked vertical beam size through the linear mapping t = y/(K L_d), with K = 36.2 μrad/fs independently calibrated by scanning the THz–electron delay at the zero-crossing (Section III.B, Eq. 5). The unstreaked vertical size used to quote the 1.8 fs resolution is a separately measured input, not a fitted parameter tuned to reproduce the reported 26–44 fs bunch lengths. The energy-window interpretation invokes the standard second-order transport relation z = z0 + R56 δ0 + T566 δ0^2 (Section II.A, Eq. 2), a textbook formula that is not fitted to the data. The numerical simulations use assumed beam parameters (5 fC, 4.55 MeV, 10 fs initial RMS bunch length, 6% FWHM energy spread) and are not inverted to match Table I; therefore the simulation does not smuggle the measured trend in as an input. Self-citations (Refs. 19, 21, 31, 32, 36) describe the group's beamline, prior DBA compression work, and plasma linearization studies, but the load-bearing claims—the calibrated streaking strength, the dipole energy calibration, the measured C-shaped LPS, and the energy-window-dependent bunch-length trend—are each supported by data and standard formulas presented in this paper. The unquantified nonlinearity of the THz streaking field over the 26–44 fs bunch extent, raised by the skeptic, is a legitimate experimental systematic concern but is not a circularity: no quantity in the analysis is defined in terms of the target result, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. Accordingly, no enumerated circularity pattern is exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard second-order longitudinal transport and on the linearity of the THz-TDC calibration. The main assumptions are the transport model (Eq. 2), linear streaking over the bunch, moderate space-charge, and stable beam sizes. No new physical entities are introduced. Three simulation input parameters are chosen rather than measured, but they do not drive the experimental conclusion.

free parameters (3)
  • Initial FWHM energy spread (simulation) = 6%
    Simulation input chosen to provide a broad phase-space range for applying the narrower energy windows used in the analysis; not directly measured from the experiment.
  • Initial RMS bunch length (simulation) = 10 fs
    Assumed initial temporal length for the simulated LWFA beam; not independently measured in the paper.
  • Bunch charge (simulation) = 5 fC
    Simulation input that controls the strength of space-charge effects, stated to be moderate at this level.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Longitudinal transport is described by z = z0 + R56 delta0 + T566 delta0^2 with constant R56 and T566 over the bunch.
    Standard second-order transport model invoked in Section II.A (Eq. 2); assumed valid for the LWFA beams after DBA transport.
  • domain assumption The THz-TDC maps the longitudinal coordinate linearly onto the vertical coordinate, with the calibrated K constant over the full bunch duration.
    Section III.B calibrates K near the THz zero-crossing and assumes linear streaking; nonlinear field curvature over the whole bunch is not characterized.
  • domain assumption Space-charge effects are moderate for fC-level charges and do not alter the dominant transport picture.
    Section II.B states that space-charge remains moderate for the fC-level bunch charge; no quantitative verification is given.
  • domain assumption The unstreaked vertical and horizontal beam sizes are stable and can be deconvolved from the streaked images.
    Used in Eqs. (5) and (6); fluctuations are quoted but a full covariance treatment is absent.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Terahertz-based longitudinal phase space diagnostics of laser wakefield accelerated electron beams." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RSCUSYXN

@misc{pith2026260808586,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Terahertz-based longitudinal phase space diagnostics of laser wakefield accelerated electron beams},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RSCUSYXN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.08586}
}
read the original abstract

Femtosecond relativistic electron beams are key probes of ultrafast dynamics, and their pulse duration directly limits the achievable temporal resolution. Laser wakefield acceleration (LWFA) provides a compact source of such beams, but the injection-induced energy spread makes bunch compression sensitive to nonlinear longitudinal transport, motivating direct longitudinal phase space (LPS) measurements. Here, a terahertz transverse-deflecting cavity (THz-TDC) combined with a dipole magnet is used to reconstruct the nonlinear LPS of LWFA electron bunches compressed in a double-bend achromat (DBA), resolving a characteristic C-shaped distribution associated with higher-order longitudinal transport. At an average energy of approximately 4.55 MeV, the diagnostic achieves a temporal resolving power of 1.8 fs and an energy resolution of 6.0 keV, corresponding to a relative energy resolution of 0.13%. For comparable energy spreads of approximately 2.9%, shifting the transmitted energy-window center from 4.574 MeV to 4.532 MeV moves the selected beam away from a low-slope region of the nonlinear LPS and increases the root-mean-square bunch length from 26 fs to 42 fs; with the window center held near 4.553 MeV, increasing the energy spread from 2.0% to 4.4% lengthens the bunch from 27 fs to 44 fs. These results show that the final bunch duration is governed by both the position and width of the transmitted energy window within the nonlinear LPS, establishing an LPS-guided strategy for optimizing DBA-compressed LWFA electron bunches and providing a basis for future higher-order phase-space correction.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.08586 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic of DBA-based compression. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Numerical simulations of LPS evolution and energy-window-dependent bunch length. The simulated LPS distributions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Experimental setup and THz pulse characterization. (a) Layout of the LWFA-UED beamline and THz-TDC diagnostics. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. THz-TDC streaking calibration. (a) Unstreaked elec [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Measured LPS distributions under aperture-defined energy-window conditions. Panels (a)–(c) show measurements [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    B. J. Siwick, J. R. Dwyer, R. E. Jordan, and R. D. Miller, An atomic-level view of melting using femtosecond elec- tron diffraction, Science302, 1382 (2003)

    work page 2003

  2. [2]

    M. Mo, Z. Chen, R. Li, M. Dunning, B. Witte, J. Bald- win, L. Fletcher, J. Kim, A. Ng, R. Redmer,et al., Heterogeneous to homogeneous melting transition visual- ized with ultrafast electron diffraction, Science360, 1451 (2018)

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    J. Yang, X. Zhu, T. J. Wolf, Z. Li, J. P. F. Nunes, R. Cof- fee, J. P. Cryan, M. G¨ uhr, K. Hegazy, T. F. Heinz,et al., Imaging CF3I conical intersection and photodissociation dynamics with ultrafast electron diffraction, Science361, 64 (2018)

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    J. Yang, X. Zhu, J. P. F. Nunes, J. K. Yu, R. M. Par- rish, T. J. Wolf, M. Centurion, M. G¨ uhr, R. Li, Y. Liu, et al., Simultaneous observation of nuclear and electronic dynamics by ultrafast electron diffraction, Science368, 885 (2020)

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    Li and P

    R. Li and P. Musumeci, Single-shot MeV transmission electron microscopy with picosecond temporal resolution, Physical Review Applied2, 024003 (2014)

    work page 2014

  6. [6]

    Kuwahara and T

    M. Kuwahara and T. Agemura, Temporal resolution in transmission electron microscopy using a photoemission electron source, Microscopy72, 97 (2023)

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Zhang, J

    C. Zhang, J. Hua, Y. Wan, C.-H. Pai, B. Guo, J. Zhang, Y. Ma, F. Li, Y. Wu, H.-H. Chu,et al., Femtosec- ond probing of plasma wakefields and observation of the plasma wake reversal using a relativistic electron bunch, Physical Review Letters119, 064801 (2017)

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    Y. Wan, S. Tata, O. Seemann, E. Y. Levine, E. Kroupp, and V. Malka, Real-time visualization of the laser-plasma wakefield dynamics, Science advances10, eadj3595 8 (2024)

    work page 2024

Show all 38 references
  1. [9]

    Khachatryan, A

    A. Khachatryan, A. Irman, F. Van Goor, and K.-J. Boller, Femtosecond electron-bunch dynamics in laser wakefields and vacuum, Physical Review Special Top- ics—Accelerators and Beams10, 121301 (2007)

    2007

  2. [10]

    D. Papp, N. Hafz, and C. Kamperidis, Self-induced ion- ization injection L WF A and generation of sub-fs electron bunches with few-cycle sub-TW laser pulses, Laser and Particle Beams37, 165 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    Winkler, M

    P. Winkler, M. Trunk, L. H¨ ubner, A. Martinez de la Ossa, S. Jalas, M. Kirchen, I. Agapov, S. Antipov, R. Brinkmann, T. Eichner,et al., Active energy com- pression of a laser-plasma electron beam, Nature640, 907 (2025)

    2025

  4. [12]

    Esarey, C

    E. Esarey, C. B. Schroeder, and W. P. Leemans, Physics of laser-driven plasma-based electron accelerators, Re- views of Modern Physics81, 1229 (2009)

    2009

  5. [13]

    A. Pak, K. Marsh, S. Martins, W. Lu, W. Mori, and C. Joshi, Injection and trapping of tunnel-ionized elec- trons into laser-produced wakes, Physical Review Letters 104, 025003 (2010)

    2010

  6. [14]

    J. Zhu, R. Assmann, M. Dohlus, U. Dorda, and B. Marchetti, Sub-fs electron bunch generation with sub- 10-fs bunch arrival-time jitter via bunch slicing in a mag- netic chicane, Physical Review Accelerators and Beams 19, 054401 (2016)

    2016

  7. [15]

    A. He, F. Willeke, L. Yu, L. Yang, T. Shaftan, G. Wang, Y. Li, Y. Hidaka, and J. Qiang, Design of low en- ergy bunch compressors with space charge effects, Phys- ical Review Special Topics-Accelerators and Beams18, 014201 (2015)

    2015

  8. [16]

    LT, Types of magnetic compressors the compres, Ac- celerator Physics and Engineering , 334

    T. LT, Types of magnetic compressors the compres, Ac- celerator Physics and Engineering , 334

  9. [17]

    H. A. Enge, Achromatic magnetic mirror for ion beams, Review of Scientific Instruments34, 385 (1963)

    1963

  10. [18]

    Rajabi, J

    A. Rajabi, J. Jazini, M. Fathi, M. Sharifian, and B. Shokri, Design, construction and measurements of an alpha magnet as a solution for compact bunch compressor for the electron beam from thermionic RF Gun, Journal of Instrumentation13(03), T03002

  11. [19]

    Y. Yang, Z. Wang, P. Lv, B. Song, P. Huang, Y. Jia, Z. Liu, L. Zheng, W. Huang, P. Musumeci,et al., Sub- 5-fs compression and synchronization of relativistic elec- tron bunches enabled by a high-gradientα-magnet and low-jitter photoinjector, arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.03946 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Pires, V

    A. Pires, V. Le Flanchec, A.-S. Chauchat, and N. Delerue, Comparison of the simulation of electron beam transport in the double alpha magnet compres- sor of a 17-MeV electron accelerator using CST PS, TraceWin, and RF-Track, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research ...

    2025

  13. [21]

    Y. Fang, F. Li, J. Hua, B. Guo, L. Zhou, B. Zhou, Z. Chen, J. Liu, Z. Zhou, Y. Wu,et al., Ultrafast elec- tron diffraction with MeV electron source from a laser wakefield accelerator, arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.12093 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  14. [22]

    H. W. Kim, N. A. Vinokurov, I. H. Baek, K. Y. Oang, M. H. Kim, Y. C. Kim, K.-H. Jang, K. Lee, S. H. Park, S. Park,et al., Towards jitter-free ultrafast electron diffraction technology, Nature Photonics14, 245 (2020)

    2020

  15. [23]

    F. Qi, Z. Ma, L. Zhao, Y. Cheng, W. Jiang, C. Lu, T. Jiang, D. Qian, Z. Wang, W. Zhang,et al., Break- ing 50 femtosecond resolution barrier in MeV ultrafast electron diffraction with a double bend achromat com- pressor, Physical Review Letters124, 134803 (2020)

    2020

  16. [24]

    P. Emma, J. Frisch, and P. Krejcik, A transverse RF deflecting structure for bunch length and phase space di- agnostics, LCLS Technical Note12(2000)

    2000

  17. [25]

    D. Marx, R. Assmann, P. Craievich, U. Dorda, A. Grudiev, and B. Marchetti, Longitudinal phase space reconstruction simulation studies using a novel X-band transverse deflecting structure at the SINBAD facility at DESY, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Re- search Sect...

    2018

  18. [26]

    H. Loos, P. Bolton, J. Clendenin, D. Dowell, S. Gierman, C. Limborg, J. Schmerge, T. Shaftan, and B. Sheehy, Longitudinal phase space tomography at the SLAC gun test facility and the BNL DUV-FEL, Nuclear Instru- ments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Sp...

    2004

  19. [27]

    Malyutin, M

    D. Malyutin, M. Gross, I. Isaev, M. Khojoyan, G. Kourkafas, M. Krasilnikov, B. Marchetti, M. Otevrel, F. Stephan, and G. Vashchenko, Longitudinal phase space tomography using a booster cavity at PITZ, Nu- clear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Sec- tion A: Accelerat...

    2017

  20. [28]

    Dijkstal, W

    P. Dijkstal, W. Qin, and S. Tomin, Longitudinal phase space diagnostics with a nonmovable corrugated pas- sive wakefield streaker, Physical Review Accelerators and Beams27, 050702 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    England, J

    R. England, J. Rosenzweig, G. Andonian, P. Musumeci, G. Travish, and R. Yoder, Sextupole correction of the longitudinal transport of relativistic beams in dispersion- less translating sections, Physical Review Special Topics- Accelerators and Beams8, 012801 (2005)

    2005

  22. [30]

    Vogel, C

    E. Vogel, C. Albrecht, N. Baboi, C. Behrens, T. Delfs, J. Eschke, C. Gerth, M. Hoffmann, M. Hoffmann, M. H¨ uning,et al., Test and commissioning of the third harmonic RF system for FLASH, Proceedings of IPAC 10, 4281 (2010)

    2010

  23. [31]

    Y. Wu, J. Hua, Z. Zhou, J. Zhang, S. Liu, B. Peng, Y. Fang, X. Ning, Z. Nie, Q. Tian,et al., Tunable plasma linearizer for compensation of nonlinear energy chirp, Physical Review Applied16, 024056 (2021)

    2021

  24. [32]

    Y. Wu, Z. Zhou, Y. Du, J. Hua, W. Lu, W. B. Mori, and C. Joshi, Linearization of an electron beam’s longitudi- nal phase space using a hollow-channel plasma, Physical Review Applied19, 064013 (2023)

    2023

  25. [33]

    L. Zhao, Z. Wang, C. Lu, R. Wang, C. Hu, P. Wang, J. Qi, T. Jiang, S. Liu, Z. Ma,et al., Terahertz streaking of few-femtosecond relativistic electron beams, Physical Review X8, 021061 (2018)

    2018

  26. [34]

    R. Li, M. Hoffmann, E. Nanni, S. Glenzer, M. Koz- ina, A. Lindenberg, B. Ofori-Okai, A. Reid, X. Shen, S. Weathersby,et al., Terahertz-based subfemtosecond metrology of relativistic electron beams, Physical Review Accelerators and Beams22, 012803 (2019)

    2019

  27. [35]

    L. Zhao, H. Tang, C. Lu, T. Jiang, P. Zhu, L. Hu, W. Song, H. Wang, J. Qiu, C. Jing,et al., Femtosecond relativistic electron beam with reduced timing jitter from THz driven beam compression, Physical Review Letters 124, 054802 (2020). 9

    2020

  28. [36]

    Fang,MeV Ultrafast Electron Diffraction Based on Laser Wakefield Acceleration, Ph.D

    Y. Fang,MeV Ultrafast Electron Diffraction Based on Laser Wakefield Acceleration, Ph.D. thesis, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China (2022), in Chinese

    2022

  29. [37]

    Guiramand, J

    L. Guiramand, J. Nkeck, X. Ropagnol, T. Ozaki, and F. Blanchard, Near-optimal intense and powerful tera- hertz source by optical rectification in lithium niobate crystal, Photonics Research10, 340 (2022)

    2022

  30. [38]

    Arpaia, R

    P. Arpaia, R. Corsini, A. Gilardi, A. Mostacci, L. Sabato, and K. N. Sjobak, Enhancing particle bunch-length mea- surements based on radio frequency deflector by the use of focusing elements, Scientific Reports10, 11457 (2020)

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.