Paper detail

Exact Keldysh theory of strong-field ionization: residue method vs saddle-point approximation

In recent articles [Mishima et al., Phys. Rev. A, 66, 033401(2002); Chao, Phys. Rev. A, 72, 053414 (2005)] it was proposed to use the residue theorem for the exact calculation of the transition amplitude describing strong-field ionization of atomic systems within Keldysh theory. This should avoid the necessity to apply the method of steepest descent (saddle-point approximation). Comparing the results of both approaches for atomic hydrogen a difference by a factor of 2 was found for the 1s, and an even more drastic deviation for the 2s state. Thus it was concluded that the use of the saddle-point approximation is problematic. In this work the deviations are explained and it is shown that the previous conclusion is based on an unjustified neglect of an important contribution occurring in the application of the residue theorem. Furthermore, the applicability of the method of steepest descent for the ionization of Rydberg states is discussed and an improvement of the standard result is suggested that successfully removes the otherwise drastic failure for large principal quantum numbers.

preprint2007arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.