- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review B

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Letter
  • Open Access

Photoionization and transient Wannier-Stark ladder in silicon: First-principles simulations versus Keldysh theory

Thibault J.-Y. Derrien1,*, Nicolas Tancogne-Dejean2, Vladimir P. Zhukov1,3, Heiko Appel2, Angel Rubio2, and Nadezhda M. Bulgakova1,†

  • 1HiLASE Centre, Institute of Physics, Academy of Science of the Czech Republic, Za Radnicí 828/5, 25241 Dolní Břežany, Czech Republic
  • 2Max Planck Institute for the Structure and Dynamics of Matter (MPSD), Luruper Chaussee 149, 22761 Hamburg, Germany
  • 3Federal Research Center for Information and Computational Technologies, 6 Lavrentyev Ave., 630090 Novosibirsk, Russia

  • *derrien@fzu.cz
  • †bulgakova@fzu.cz
PDF

Phys. Rev. B 104, L241201 – Published 22 December, 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.104.L241201

Abstract

Nonlinear photoionization of dielectrics and semiconductors is widely treated in the framework of the Keldysh theory whose validity is limited to photon energies that are small compared to the band gap and relatively low laser intensities. The time-dependent density functional theory (TDDFT) simulations, which are free of these limitations, enable one to gain insight into nonequilibrium dynamics of the electronic structure. Here we apply TDDFT to investigate the photoionization of silicon crystal by ultrashort laser pulses in a wide range of laser wavelengths and intensities and compare the results with predictions of the Keldysh theory. Photoionization rates derived from the simulations considerably exceed the data obtained with the Keldysh theory within the validity range of the latter. Possible reasons for the discrepancy are discussed and we provide fundamental data on the photoionization rates beyond the limits of the Keldysh theory. By investigating the features of the Stark shift as a function of photon energy and laser field strength, a manifestation of the transient Wannier-Stark ladder states is revealed, which become blurred with increasing laser field strength. Finally, it is shown that the TDDFT simulations can potentially provide reliable data on the electron damping time that is of high importance for large-scale modeling.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (105)

  1. L. V. Keldysh, J. Exptl. Theoret. Phys. (U.S.S.R.) 47, 1945 (1964) [Sov. Phys. JETP 20, 1307 (1965)].
  2. A. Vaidyanathan, T. W. Walker, A. H. Guenther, S. S. Mitra, and L. M. Narducci, Phys. Rev. B 20, 3526 (1979).
  3. H. Deng, W. Guo, H. Gao, L. Li, X. Yuan, W. Zheng, and X. Zu, J. Opt. 21, 075501 (2019).
  4. A. Kaiser, B. Rethfeld, M. Vicanek, and G. Simon, Phys. Rev. B 61, 11437 (2000).
  5. B. Chimier, O. Utéza, N. Sanner, M. Sentis, T. Itina, P. Lassonde, F. Légaré, F. Vidal, and J. C. Kieffer, Phys. Rev. B 84, 094104 (2011).
  6. L. Gallais, D.-B. Douti, M. Commandré, G. Batavičiuté, E. Pupka, M. Ščiuka, L. Smalakys, V. Sirutkaitis, and A. Melninkaitis, J. Appl. Phys. 117, 223103 (2015).
  7. M. Lenzner, J. Krüger, S. Sartania, Z. Cheng, C. Spielmann, G. Mourou, W. Kautek, and F. Krausz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4076 (1998).
  8. V. E. Gruzdev, Opt. Eng. 53, 122515 (2014).
  9. S. V. Popruzhenko, J. Phys. B 47, 204001 (2014).
  10. T. Otobe, M. Yamagiwa, J.-I. Iwata, K. Yabana, T. Nakatsukasa, and G. F. Bertsch, Phys. Rev. B 77, 165104 (2008).
  11. K. Yabana, T. Sugiyama, Y. Shinohara, T. Otobe, and G. F. Bertsch, Phys. Rev. B 85, 045134 (2012).
  12. A. Yamada and K. Yabana, Eur. Phys. J. D 73, 87 (2019).
  13. N. S. Shcheblanov, M. E. Povarnitsyn, P. N. Terekhin, S. Guizard, and A. Couairon, Phys. Rev. A 96, 063410 (2017).
  14. T. Otobe, Y. Shinohara, S. A. Sato, and K. Yabana, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 88, 024706 (2019).
  15. A. N. Pfeiffer and S. R. Leone, Phys. Rev. A 85, 053422 (2012).
  16. M. Anand, S. Pabst, O. Kwon, and D. E. Kim, Phys. Rev. A 95, 053420 (2017).
  17. J. R. Gulley, Opt. Eng. 51, 121805 (2012).
  18. E. J. Sie, J. W. McIver, Y.-H. Lee, L. Fu, J. Kong, and N. Gedik, Nat. Mater. 14, 290 (2014).
  19. C. Schmidt, J. Bühler, A.-C. Heinrich, J. Allerbeck, R. Podzimski, D. Berghoff, T. Meier, W. G. Schmidt, C. Reichl, W. Wegscheider, D. Brida, and A. Leitenstorfer, Nat. Commun. 9, 2890 (2018).
  20. M. Schultze, K. Ramasesha, C. D. Pemmaraju, S. A. Sato, D. Whitmore, A. Gandman, J. S. Prell, L. J. Borja, D. Prendergast, K. Yabana et al., Science 346, 1348 (2014).
  21. T. Winkler, L. Haahr-Lillevang, C. Sarpe, B. Zielinski, N. Götte, A. Senftleben, P. Balling, and T. Baumert, Nat. Phys. 14, 74 (2017).
  22. O. Kwon, T. Paasch-Colberg, V. Apalkov, B.-K. Kim, J.-J. Kim, M. I. Stockman, and D. Kim, Sci. Rep. 6, 21272 (2016).
  23. M. Uemoto, Y. Kuwabara, S. A. Sato, and K. Yabana, J. Chem. Phys. 150, 094101 (2019).
  24. L. V. Keldysh, J. Exptl. Theoret. Phys. (U.S.S.R.) 33, 994 (1957) [Sov. Phys. JETP 6, 763 (1958)].
  25. T. Higuchi, M. I. Stockman, and P. Hommelhoff, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 213901 (2014).
  26. U. De Giovannini, H. Hübener, and A. Rubio, Nano Lett. 16, 7993 (2016).
  27. The time-averaged Hamiltonian H is expressed as [ [25, 26], and Supplemental Material in Ref. [26]] H=ω2π∫02πωdt′exp[i(m−n)ωt]HF(t′)+δm,nmω where the Floquet Hamiltonian HF(t), as an example of a two-level system with the band gap energy Eg at Γ-point, is given by HFt=Eg/200−Eg/2+Acosωt0M12M210. Here, M12 and M21 are the material-dependent dipolar matrix elements characterizing the dipolar transitions between two electronic levels (indexed by 1 and 2); A is the field strength; ω is the photon frequency. Note that this model can easily be extended to n bands exchanging m photons [25].
  28. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevB.104.L241201 for details on the models employed in this study with referencing to [1, 4, 8, 10, 11, 19, 22, 26, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81], additional TDDFT results, the excitation rates obtained from TDDFT for different wavelengths and laser intensity ranges, and an URL of our database of the excitation rates.
  29. E. K. Gross, J. F. Dobson, and M. Petersilka, in Density Functional Theory II (Springer, Berlin, 1996), pp. 81–172.
  30. M. A. L. Marques, N. T. Maitra, F. M. S. Nogueira, E. K. U. Gross, and A. Rubio, eds., Fundamentals of Time-Dependent Density Functional Theory, Lecture Notes in Physics (Springer, New York, 2011).
  31. M. Ruggenthaler, N. Tancogne-Dejean, J. Flick, H. Appel, and A. Rubio, Nat. Rev. Chem. 2, 0118 (2018).
  32. C. A. Ullrich, Time-Dependent Density-Functional Theory: Concepts and Applications (Oxford University Press, New York, 2012).
  33. F. Tran and P. Blaha, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 226401 (2009).
  34. E. K. U. Gross and W. Kohn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 2850 (1985).
  35. R. W. Godby, M. Schlüter, and L. J. Sham, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 2415 (1986).
  36. O. Sugino and R. Car, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 1823 (1995).
  37. J. M. Zuo, P. Blaha, and K. Schwarz, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 9, 7541 (1997).
  38. D. Waroquiers, A. Lherbier, A. Miglio, M. Stankovski, S. Poncé, M. J. T. Oliveira, M. Giantomassi, G.-M. Rignanese, and X. Gonze, Phys. Rev. B 87, 075121 (2013).
  39. S. A. Sato, Y. Taniguchi, Y. Shinohara, and K. Yabana, J. Chem. Phys. 143, 224116 (2015).
  40. M. A. Marques, A. Castro, G. F. Bertsch, and A. Rubio, Comput. Phys. Commun. 151, 60 (2003).
  41. A. Castro, H. Appel, M. Oliveira, C. A. Rozzi, X. Andrade, F. Lorenzen, M. A. L. Marques, E. K. U. Gross, and A. Rubio, Phys. Status Solidi B 243, 2465 (2006).
  42. X. Andrade, J. Alberdi-Rodriguez, D. A. Strubbe, M. J. T. Oliveira, F. Nogueira, A. Castro, J. Muguerza, A. Arruabarrena, S. G. Louie, A. Aspuru-Guzik, A. Rubio, and M. A. L. Marques, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 24, 233202 (2012).
  43. N. Troullier and J. L. Martins, Phys. Rev. B 43, 1993 (1991).
  44. A. Castro, M. A. L. Marques, and A. Rubio, J. Chem. Phys. 121, 3425 (2004).
  45. C. Mézel, A. Bourgeade, and L. Hallo, Phys. Plasmas 17, 113504 (2010).
  46. J. R. Gulley and W. M. Dennis, Phys. Rev. A 81, 033818 (2010).
  47. J. R. Gulley, S. W. Winkler, W. M. Dennis, C. M. Liebig, and R. Stoian, Phys. Rev. A 85, 013808 (2012).
  48. J. R. Gulley and T. E. Lanier, Phys. Rev. B 90, 155119 (2014).
  49. J. R. Gulley, J. Liao, and T. E. Lanier, Proc. SPIE 8972, 89720T (2014).
  50. V. E. Gruzdev, Phys. Rev. B 75, 205106 (2007).
  51. V. E. Gruzdev, AIP Conf. Proc. 1278, 131 (2010).
  52. P. Jürgens, M. Jupé, M. Gyamfi, and D. Ristau, Proc. SPIE 10014, 100141C (2016).
  53. C. R. McDonald, G. Vampa, G. Orlando, P. B. Corkum, and T. Brabec, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 594, 012021 (2015).
  54. C. R. McDonald, G. Vampa, P. B. Corkum, and T. Brabec, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 173601 (2017).
  55. V. Turkowski and C. A. Ullrich, Phys. Rev. B 77, 075204 (2008).
  56. J. Laflamme Janssen, Y. Gillet, S. Poncé, A. Martin, M. Torrent, and X. Gonze, Phys. Rev. B 93, 205147 (2016).
  57. L. N. Gaier, M. Lein, M. I. Stockman, P. L. Knight, P. B. Corkum, M. Y. Ivanov, and G. L. Yudin, J. Phys. B 37, L57 (2004).
  58. M. Partanen, T. Häyrynen, J. Oksanen, and J. Tulkki, Phys. Rev. A 95, 063850 (2017).
  59. L. Fritsche, Phys. Status Solidi B 13, 487 (1966).
  60. C. Cohen-Tannoudji and S. Reynaud, J. Phys. B 10, 345 (1977).
  61. J. Flick, D. M. Welakuh, M. Ruggenthaler, H. Appel, and A. Rubio, ACS Photonics 6, 2757 (2019).
  62. V. Rokaj, M. Ruggenthaler, F. G. Eich, and A. Rubio, arXiv:2006.09236 (2021).
  63. M. Durach, A. Rusina, M. F. Kling, and M. I. Stockman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 086803 (2010).
  64. M. Durach, A. Rusina, M. F. Kling, and M. I. Stockman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 086602 (2011).
  65. V. Rokaj, D. M. Welakuh, M. Ruggenthaler, and A. Rubio, J. Phys. B 51, 034005 (2018).
  66. T. Tamaya and T. Kato, Phys. Rev. B 100, 081203(R) (2019).
  67. T. Kato, K. Nobusada, and S. Saito, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 89, 024301 (2020).
  68. P. Xia, T. Tamaya, C. Kim, F. Lu, T. Kanai, N. Ishii, J. Itatani, H. Akiyama, and T. Kato, Phys. Rev. B 104, L121202 (2021).
  69. G. H. Wannier, Phys. Rev. 117, 432 (1960).
  70. G. H. Wannier, Phys. Rev. 181, 1364 (1969).
  71. G. N. Watson, A Treatise on the Theory of Bessel Functions (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995).
  72. R. M. Martin, Electronic Structure: Basic Theory and Practical Methods (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004).
  73. B. C. Stuart, M. D. Feit, S. Herman, A. M. Rubenchik, B. W. Shore, and M. D. Perry, Phys. Rev. B 53, 1749 (1996).
  74. S. Pearl, N. Rotenberg, and H. M. van Driel, Appl. Phys. Lett. 93, 131102 (2008).
  75. A. D. Bristow, N. Rotenberg, and H. M. van Driel, Appl. Phys. Lett. 90, 191104 (2007).
  76. D. Reitze, T. Zhang, W. M. Wood, and M. C. Downer, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 7, 84 (1990).
  77. T. Sjodin, H. Petek, and H.-L. Dai, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5664 (1998).
  78. T. F. Boggess, S. C. Moss, I. W. Boyd, and A. L. Smirl, Opt. Lett. 9, 291 (1984).
  79. E. D. Palik, Handbook of Optical Constants of Solids (Academic Press, New York, 1985).
  80. J. Shah, R. F. Leheny, and C. Lin, Solid State Commun. 18, 1035 (1976).
  81. M. Noda, K. Iida, M. Yamaguchi, T. Yatsui, and K. Nobusada, Phys. Rev. Appl. 11, 044053 (2019).
  82. A. Schiffrin, T. Paasch-Colberg, N. Karpowicz, V. Apalkov, D. Gerster, S. Mühlbrandt, M. Korbman, J. Reichert, M. Schultze, S. Holzner, J. V. Barth, R. Kienberger, R. Ernstorfer, V. S. Yakovlev, M. I. Stockman, and F. Krausz, Nature (London) 493, 70 (2012).
  83. M. Schultze, E. M. Bothschafter, A. Sommer, S. Holzner, W. Schweinberger, M. Fiess, M. Hofstetter, R. Kienberger, V. Apalkov, V. S. Yakovlev, M. I. Stockman, and F. Krausz, Nature (London) 493, 75 (2012).
  84. X. Andrade, D. Strubbe, U. De Giovannini, A. H. Larsen, M. J. T. Oliveira, J. Alberdi-Rodriguez, A. Varas, I. Theophilou, N. Helbig, M. J. Verstraete, L. Stella, F. Nogueira, A. Aspuru-Guzik, A. Castro, M. A. L. Marques, and A. Rubio, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 17, 31371 (2015).
  85. Applicability of perturbative nonlinear optics is believed to be valid for relatively small optical driver fields as compared to a characteristic atomic field strength Eat. [104]. In Si, the Eat value can be estimated as ∼26 V/nm [93]. We note that, according to recent studies [105], optical nonlinearities related to photoionization become nonperturbative at even smaller fields, which are defined by the Keldysh parameter γ.
  86. M. Lucchini, S. A. Sato, A. Ludwig, J. Herrmann, M. Volkov, L. Kasmi, Y. Shinohara, K. Yabana, L. Gallmann, and U. Keller, Science 353, 916 (2016).
  87. T. Otobe, Y. Shinohara, S. A. Sato, and K. Yabana, Phys. Rev. B 93, 045124 (2016).
  88. V. V. Temnov, K. Sokolowski-Tinten, P. Zhou, A. El-Khamhawy, and D. von der Linde, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 237403 (2006).
  89. For 1600 nm and 800 nm wavelengths (see Ref. [28]), the slope of the nexc(I), obtained in the TDDFT simulations at low intensities, corresponds to n=EgΓ/ℏω.
  90. The employed formula is available in Ref. [4] and in the Supplemental Material [28].
  91. S. M. Golin, S. E. Kirkwood, D. D. Klug, D. M. Villeneuve, D. M. Rayner, C. A. Trallero Herrero, and P. B. Corkum, J. Phys. B 47, 204025 (2014).
  92. S. A. Sato, K. Yabana, Y. Shinohara, T. Otobe, and G. F. Bertsch, Phys. Rev. B 89, 064304 (2014).
  93. N. M. Bulgakova, R. Stoian, A. Rosenfeld, I. V. Hertel, W. Marine, and E. E. B. Campbell, Appl. Phys. A 81, 345 (2005).
  94. T. Higuchi, C. Heide, K. Ullmann, H. B. Weber, and P. Hommelhoff, Nature (London) 550, 224 (2017).
  95. F. Schlaepfer, M. Lucchini, S. A. Sato, M. Volkov, L. Kasmi, N. Hartmann, A. Rubio, L. Gallmann, and U. Keller, Nat. Phys. 14, 560 (2018).
  96. F. Mahmood, C.-K. Chan, Z. Alpichshev, D. Gardner, Y. Lee, P. A. Lee, and N. Gedik, Nat. Phys. 12, 306 (2016).
  97. K. Sokolowski-Tinten and D. von der Linde, Phys. Rev. B 61, 2643 (2000).
  98. S. A. Sato, Y. Shinohara, T. Otobe, and K. Yabana, Phys. Rev. B 90, 174303 (2014).
  99. L. Sudrie, A. Couairon, M. Franco, B. Lamouroux, B. Prade, S. Tzortzakis, and A. Mysyrowicz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 186601 (2002).
  100. N. M. Bulgakova, V. P. Zhukov, and Y. P. Meshcheryakov, Appl. Phys. B 113, 437 (2013).
  101. V. P. Zhukov, S. Akturk, and N. M. Bulgakova, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 36, 1556 (2019).
  102. C. V. Shank, R. Yen, and C. Hirlimann, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 454 (1983).
  103. T. J.-Y. Derrien, T. E. Itina, R. Torres, T. Sarnet, and M. Sentis, J. Appl. Phys. 114, 083104 (2013).
  104. R. W. Boyd, Nonlinear Optics (Academic Press, New York, 2008).
  105. A. Zheltikov, Opt. Express 27, 8246 (2019).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. B 104, L241201– Published 22 December, 2021
  • Received 20 August 2021
  • Revised 13 November 2021
  • Accepted 16 November 2021
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation