4.6 Article

Time delays for attosecond streaking in photoionization of neon

Journal

PHYSICAL REVIEW A
Volume 89, Issue 3, Pages -

Publisher

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.89.033417

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. FWF-Austria [P23359- N16]
  2. US National Science Foundation through a grant for the Institute for Theoretical Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics at Harvard University
  3. Harvard-Smithsonian Center [PHY-1068140, PHY-1212450, PHY-090031]
  4. European Research Council [290981]
  5. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  6. Division Of Physics [1068140] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  7. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  8. Division Of Physics [1212450] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  9. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P 23359] Funding Source: researchfish
  10. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P23359] Funding Source: Austrian Science Fund (FWF)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We revisit the time-resolved photoemission in neon atoms as probed by attosecond streaking. We calculate streaking time shifts for the emission of 2(p) and 2(s) electrons and compare the relative delay as measured in a recent experiment by Schultze et al. [Science 328, 1658 (2010)]. The B-spline R-matrix method is employed to calculate accurate Eisenbud- Wigner- Smith time delays from multielectron dipole transition matrix elements for photoionization. The additional laser field-induced time shifts in the exit channel are obtained from separate, time-dependent simulations of a full streaking process by solving the time-dependent Schr odinger equation on the single-active-electron level. The resulting accurate total relative streaking time shifts between 2(s) and 2(p) emission lie well below the experimental data. We identify the presence of unresolved shake- up satellites in the experiment as a potential source of error in the determination of streaking time shifts.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available