Total yield of electron-positron pairs produced from vacuum in strong electromagnetic fields: validity of the locally constant field approximation
D. G. Sevostyanov, I. A. Aleksandrov, G. Plunien, V. M. Shabaev

TL;DR
This paper critically assesses the validity of the locally constant field approximation (LCFA) for predicting electron-positron pair production in strong electromagnetic fields by comparing it with exact numerical methods across various field configurations.
Contribution
It provides a comprehensive numerical analysis to determine the parameter regimes where the LCFA is valid, challenging the conventional reliance on the Keldysh parameter.
Findings
LCFA's validity depends on specific field parameters.
The Keldysh parameter is not a reliable indicator of LCFA accuracy.
Numerical benchmarks identify regimes where LCFA can be confidently applied.
Abstract
The widely-used locally constant field approximation (LCFA) can be utilized in order to derive a simple closed-form expression for the total number of particles produced in the presence of a strong electromagnetic field of a general spatio-temporal configuration. A usual justification for this approximate approach is the requirement that the external field vary slowly in space and time. In this investigation, we examine the validity of the LCFA by comparing its predictions to the results obtained by means of exact nonperturbative numerical techniques. To benchmark the LCFA in the regime of small field amplitudes and low frequencies, we employ a semiclassical approach. As a reference, we consider a standing electromagnetic wave oscillating both in time and space as well as two spatially uniform field configurations: Sauter pulse and oscillating electric field. Performing a thorough…
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.
