journal article·2024-12-26Open access

Determining Key Factors for the Open-Loop Control of Molecular Fragmentation Using Shaped Strong Fields

Jacob Stamm, Sung Kwon, Marcos Dantus

Abstract

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Pulse shaping has long been employed for tailoring femtosecond laser pulses to study and control the fragmentation of polyatomic molecules. In many cases, a physical explanation connecting the properties of the field to the observed control is difficult to ascertain. We utilized 80 bit binary spectral phase functions to parametrize and map the search space, gaining insight into which pulse parameters most impact the ion yield and fragmentation pattern for the relatively large triethylamine [N(C 2 H 5 ) 3 ] molecule. Pulse structures used to control the m / z 86 branching ratio beyond a simple intensity dependence are identified and compared to pump–probe results. All of these findings are explained in terms of control via a dissociative Rydberg state in the neutral molecule. This methodology may be used to discover new control mechanisms and shed light onto which pulse parameters most influence the interaction between strong field lasers and matter.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Laser-Matter Interactions and Applications · Mass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications · Laser-Plasma Interactions and Diagnostics

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Chemistry

Michigan State University

Department of Physics and Astronomy

Department of Electric and Computer Engineering

Funding

Basic Energy Sciences · Air Force Office of Scientific Research

References (38)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1126/science.282.5390.91910.1126/science.282.5390.919 ↗
2. 10.1021/cr020668r10.1021/cr020668r ↗
3. 10.1039/b417201a10.1039/b417201a ↗
4. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.75.341010.1103/PhysRevLett.75.3410 ↗
5. 10.1021/ja982462710.1021/ja9824627 ↗
6. 10.1038/2432910.1038/24329 ↗
7. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.24390210.1103/PhysRevLett.87.243902 ↗
8. 10.1021/jp071691p10.1021/jp071691p ↗
9. 10.1088/1367-2630/11/10/10505110.1088/1367-2630/11/10/105051 ↗
10. 10.1088/1367-2630/12/7/07500810.1088/1367-2630/12/7/075008 ↗
11. 10.1002/cphc.20040034210.1002/cphc.200400342 ↗
12. 10.1364/OPEX.12.00106110.1364/OPEX.12.001061 ↗
13. 10.1021/jp050295910.1021/jp0502959 ↗
14. 10.1002/cphc.20060028310.1002/cphc.200600283 ↗
15. 10.1088/2040-8986/aa850210.1088/2040-8986/aa8502 ↗
16. 10.1016/S0009-2614(00)00810-110.1016/S0009-2614(00)00810-1 ↗
17. 10.1103/PhysRevA.73.06340910.1103/PhysRevA.73.063409 ↗
18. 10.1002/jrs.621910.1002/jrs.6219 ↗
19. 10.1109/3.13520910.1109/3.135209 ↗
20. 10.1364/OPEX.13.01088210.1364/OPEX.13.010882 ↗
21. 10.1103/PhysRevA.60.128710.1103/PhysRevA.60.1287 ↗
22. 10.1002/jms.114810.1002/jms.1148 ↗
23. 10.1063/1.44375710.1063/1.443757 ↗
24. 10.1016/S0301-0104(01)00223-310.1016/S0301-0104(01)00223-3 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.ijms.2011.01.02410.1016/j.ijms.2011.01.024 ↗
26. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) · 1998
27. 10.1063/1.169887810.1063/1.1698878 ↗
28. 10.1063/1.47158510.1063/1.471585 ↗
29. 10.1063/1.47344810.1063/1.473448 ↗
30. 10.1063/1.44240910.1063/1.442409 ↗
31. 10.1021/jp804123610.1021/jp8041236 ↗
32. 10.1063/1.47921710.1063/1.479217 ↗
33. 10.1039/C5SC03616J10.1039/C5SC03616J ↗
34. 10.1002/ange.20190222810.1002/ange.201902228 ↗
35. 10.1021/jp057470610.1021/jp0574706 ↗
36. 10.1063/5.008483710.1063/5.0084837 ↗
37. 10.1016/S0003-2670(00)86263-710.1016/S0003-2670(00)86263-7 ↗
38. 10.1063/1.45215510.1063/1.452155 ↗