MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Theoretical Analysis of High-Harmonic Generation in Solids

2014· article· en· W2321891140 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigh harmonic generationPhysicsBand gapLaserSaddle pointHarmonicPhotonCondensed matter physicsOpticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate theoretically high-harmonic generation (HHG) in bulk crystals exposed to intense midinfrared lasers with photon energies smaller than the band gap. The two main mechanisms, interband and intraband HHG, are explored. Our analysis indicates that the interband current neglected so far is the dominant mechanism for HHG. Saddle point analysis in the Keldysh limit yields an intuitive picture of interband HHG in solids similar to atomic HHG. Interband and intraband HHG exhibit a fundamentally different wavelength dependence. This signature can be used to experimentally distinguish between the two mechanisms in order to verify their importance.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.839

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it