Controlling the sense of molecular rotation: classical vs quantum analysis
Yuri Khodorkovsky, Kenta Kitano, Hirokazu Hasegawa, Yasuhiro Ohshima,, and Ilya Sh. Averbukh

TL;DR
This paper compares classical and quantum models of laser-induced molecular rotation control, showing they agree well under experimental conditions but diverge near quantum revival times, with both approaches effectively predicting ensemble properties.
Contribution
It provides a detailed comparison of classical and quantum descriptions for controlling molecular rotation with laser pulses, highlighting their agreement and differences.
Findings
Classical and quantum models agree on optimal pulse parameters and induced angular momentum.
Both approaches predict similar time-averaged molecular distributions.
Quantum and classical analyses diverge near quantum revival times.
Abstract
Recently, it was predicted theoretically and verified experimentally that a pair of delayed and cross-polarized short laser pulses can create molecular ensembles with a well defined sense of rotation (clockwise or counterclockwise). Here we provide a comparative study of the classical and quantum aspects of the underlying mechanism for linear molecules and for symmetric tops, like benzene molecules, that were used for the first experimental demonstration of the effect. Very good quantitative agreement is found between the classical description of the process and the rigorous quantum mechanical analysis at the relevant experimental conditions. Both approaches predict the same optimal values for the delay between pulses and the angle between them, and deliver the same magnitude of the induced oriented angular momentum of the molecular ensemble. As expected, quantum and classical analysis…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
