MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Perturbative High Harmonic Wave Front Control

2017· article· en· W2582193081 on OpenAlexafffund
Zhengyan Li, Graham G. Brown, Dong Hyuk Ko, Fanqi Kong, Ladan Arissian, P. B. Corkum

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsJoint Attosecond Science LaboratoryUniversity of Ottawa
FundersAviation and Missile Research, Development, and Engineering CenterNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Air ForceAdvanced Research Projects AgencyAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchDefense Advanced Research Projects AgencyCanada Research ChairsCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsOpticsWavefrontPhysicsHarmonicsExtreme ultravioletLaserHigh harmonic generationFocus (optics)HarmonicDiffractionBeam (structure)Laser beam qualityPulse (music)Laser beamsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We pattern the wave front of a high harmonic beam by intersecting the intense driving laser pulse that generates the high harmonic with a weak control pulse. To illustrate the potential of wave-front control, we imprint a Fresnel zone plate pattern on a harmonic beam, causing the harmonics to focus and defocus. The quality of the focus that we achieve is measured using the spectral wave-front optical reconstruction by diffraction method. We will show that it is possible to enhance the peak intensity by orders of magnitude without a physical optical element in the path of the extreme ultraviolet (XUV) beam. Through perturbative wave-front control, XUV beams can be created with a flexibility approaching what technology allows for visible and infrared light.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicLaser-Matter Interactions and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207