4.8 Article

Carrier-Envelope Phase-Dependent Strong-Field Excitation

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS
卷 128, 期 17, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.173201

关键词

-

资金

  1. Australian Research Council's Linkage Infrastructure, Equipment and Facilities scheme [LE160100027]
  2. Australian Government RTP Scholarship
  3. Griffith University International Postgraduate Research Scholarship (GUIPRS)
  4. Multidisciplinary Cooperative Research Program in CCS, University of Tsukuba
  5. United States National Science Foundation [PHY-1402899, PHY-1708108, PHY-1803844, PHY-2110023]
  6. ARC Discovery Early Career Researcher Grant [DE130101628]
  7. Australian Research Council [DE130101628, LE160100027] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This joint experimental-theoretical study focuses on the carrier-envelope phase (CEP) of a few-cycle pulse and its effect on atomic excitation processes. The results confirm the theoretical predictions and suggest the use of tailored laser fields for coherent control of strong-field excitation. The study shows distinct CEP-dependent behavior for bound-state population at low and high intensities.
We present a joint experimental-theoretical study on the effect of the carrier-envelope phase (CEP) of a few-cycle pulse on the atomic excitation process. We focus on the excitation rates of argon at intensities in the transition between the multiphoton and tunneling regimes. Through numerical simulations, we show that the resulting bound-state population is highly sensitive to both the intensity and the CEP. The experimental data clearly agree with the theoretical prediction, and the results encourage the use of precisely tailored laser fields to coherently control the strong-field excitation process. We find a markedly different behavior for the CEP-dependent bound-state population at low and high intensities with a clear boundary, which we attribute to the transition from the multiphoton to the tunneling regime

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据