MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211101250 · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.81.163

Attosecond physics

2009· article· en· W4211101250 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ferenc Krausz, Misha Ivanov

Bibliographic record

VenueReviews of Modern Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAttosecondPhysicsExtreme ultravioletTracking (education)Field (mathematics)OpticsEngineering physicsUltrashort pulseLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intense ultrashort light pulses comprising merely a few wave cycles became routinely available by the turn of the millennium. The technologies underlying their production and measurement as well as relevant theoretical modeling have been reviewed in the pages of Reviews of Modern Physics (Brabec and Krausz, 2000). Since then, measurement and control of the subcycle field evolution of few-cycle light have opened the door to a radically new approach to exploring and controlling processes of the microcosm. The hyperfast-varying electric field of visible light permitted manipulation and tracking of the atomic-scale motion of electrons. Striking implications include controlled generation and measurement of single attosecond pulses of extreme ultraviolet light as well as trains of them, and real-time observation of atomic-scale electron dynamics. The tools and techniques for steering and tracing electronic motion in atoms, molecules, and nanostructures are now becoming available, marking the birth of attosecond physics. In this article these advances are reviewed and some of the expected implications are addressed.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.006

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5,339
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReviews of Modern PhysicsSame topicLaser-Matter Interactions and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207