Next Article in Journal
Design and Research of Photonic Reservoir Computing for Optical Channel Equalization
Previous Article in Journal
Recent Progress in Organic Optoelectronic Synaptic Devices
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Visualization of High-Intensity Laser–Matter Interactions in Virtual Reality and Web Browser

by
Martin Matys
1,*,
James P. Thistlewood
1,2,
Mariana Kecová
1,
Petr Valenta
1,
Martina Greplová Žáková
1,
Martin Jirka
1,3,
Prokopis Hadjisolomou
1,
Alžběta Špádová
1,3,
Marcel Lamač
1 and
Sergei V. Bulanov
1
1
ELI Beamlines Facility, The Extreme Light Infrastructure ERIC, Za Radnici 835, 25241 Dolni Brezany, Czech Republic
2
Department of Physics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PU, UK
3
Faculty of Nuclear Sciences and Physical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Brehova 7, 11519 Prague, Czech Republic
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Photonics 2025, 12(5), 436; https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics12050436
Submission received: 1 April 2025 / Revised: 24 April 2025 / Accepted: 28 April 2025 / Published: 30 April 2025

Abstract

:
We present the Virtual Beamline (VBL) application, an interactive web-based platform for visualizing high-intensity laser–matter interactions using particle-in-cell (PIC) simulations, with future potential for experimental data visualization. These interactions include ion acceleration, electron acceleration, γ -flash generation, electron–positron pair production, and attosecond and spiral pulse generation. Developed at the ELI Beamlines facility, VBL integrates a custom-built WebGL engine with WebXR-based Virtual Reality (VR) support, allowing users to explore complex plasma dynamics in non-VR mode on a computer screen or in fully immersive VR mode using a head-mounted display. The application runs directly in a standard web browser, ensuring broad accessibility. VBL enhances the visualization of PIC simulations by efficiently processing and rendering four main data types: point particles, 1D lines, 2D textures, and 3D volumes. By utilizing interactive 3D visualization, it overcomes the limitations of traditional 2D representations, offering enhanced spatial understanding and real-time manipulation of visualization parameters such as time steps, data layers, and colormaps. Users can interactively explore the visualized data by moving their body or using a controller for navigation, zooming, and rotation. These interactive capabilities improve data exploration and interpretation, making VBL a valuable tool for both scientific analysis and educational outreach. The visualizations are hosted online and freely accessible on our server, providing researchers, the general public, and broader audiences with an interactive tool to explore complex plasma physics simulations. By offering an intuitive and dynamic approach to large-scale datasets, VBL enhances both scientific research and knowledge dissemination in high-intensity laser–matter physics.

1. Introduction

The rapid advancement of high-power laser technology has led to the development of numerous multipetawatt laser facilities worldwide [1]. This progress has fueled growing interest in compact, laser-driven accelerators for charged particles [2,3,4,5,6,7,8] and radiation sources [9,10]. Recent breakthroughs in laser electron acceleration have demonstrated energy gains reaching 10 gigaelectronvolts (GeV) over just tens of centimeters [11,12], while ion acceleration experiments have achieved proton beams with energies up to 150 MeV [13]. These advancements have enabled a wide range of applications, including inertial nuclear fusion [14,15], medical applications [7], and security scanning and probing [16,17]. High-power lasers are also instrumental in generating high-brightness photon sources [18] and high-order harmonic generation through laser interactions with gases [19] and solid-density targets [9,20]. These advancements open new frontiers in extreme field physics, enabling studies of superstrong electromagnetic fields in quantum regimes [21,22,23,24]. Notable achievements include the experimental creation of electron–positron pairs from vacuum [25]. Furthermore, theoretical predictions suggest that multiphoton Compton scattering can efficiently generate γ -ray flashes [26,27,28,29,30], with initial experimental confirmation already reported [31]. The continuous development of laser applications is closely linked to advancements in laser pulse engineering. Optimizing pulse characteristics, such as steepening the pulse front [32,33], increasing peak intensity [34], minimizing prepulses [35], and reducing pulse duration from femtoseconds to attoseconds and beyond [36], is crucial for pushing the boundaries of laser–matter interaction.
As these laser-driven processes become increasingly complex, analyzing the vast and multidimensional datasets generated by simulations and experiments requires advanced visualization techniques. Traditional methods, such as static figures and videos, are inherently limited in how much data they can represent, often failing to capture the full spatial and temporal dynamics of high-dimensional simulations. To overcome these limitations, interactive 3D environments, including Virtual Reality (VR), provide an intuitive way to explore plasma dynamics, particle trajectories, plasma structures, and field structures in real time. These environments can be extended to 4D or multi-D by incorporating temporal evolution [37] and additional dimension variable (e.g., energy [38]), offering even deeper insight into complex physical phenomena.
Scientific visualizations of laser–matter interactions and plasma physics using VR are increasingly featured at conferences [39,40]. The integration of VR enhances these visualizations by enabling dynamic user interaction with complex datasets, moving beyond static depictions. As adoption grows, VR-based visualization is expected to become a standard tool for scientific analysis, presentation, and collaborative research. By allowing users to navigate simulations through movement, zooming, rotation, and time control, VR and 4D visualization provide an intuitive way to explore and understand complex datasets.
To support this approach, we have developed the Virtual Beamline (VBL) application at the ELI Beamlines facility [39], providing an interactive and accessible platform for scientific visualization. The latest version integrates a custom-built WebGL [41] application with VR support powered by WebXR [42]. This design allows VBL to be hosted on a server and accessed by users over the internet, where it runs via a standard web browser. When VR mode is enabled, the application runs in a head-mounted display (HMD), providing an immersive experience. For users without a VR HMD, it can also be accessed on a regular 2D computer screen.
Both experimental research and theoretical studies using computer simulations generate large volumes of data [43] that must be processed, analyzed, and effectively communicated. Rather than storing all data in raw form, it is more practical to preserve only selected portions as interactive visualizations, which are easier to interpret while remaining processable by computers for further analysis. To facilitate this, our repository of visualizations is publicly available [44] (see Figure 1), currently featuring 11 interactive visualizations based on data simulated at the ELI Beamlines facility.
Our primary focus is on visualizing data from particle-in-cell (PIC) simulations of high-intensity laser–matter interactions. However, the framework is flexible and can support the visualization of various types of mesh and point data.
This paper is organized as follows. The VBL application and its specifications are described in Section 2, with subsections detailing various aspects, including data representation, visualization workflow, user interaction, future development and related VR approaches, covered in Section 2.1, Section 2.2, Section 2.3, Section 2.4 and Section 2.5, respectively. Section 3 presents visualizations of various topics in high-intensity laser–matter interactions, categorized into four groups, each described in a separate section, with a brief introduction outlining their applications. Section 3.1 covers ion acceleration, Section 3.2 focuses on electron acceleration, Section 3.3 discusses γ -flash generation and electron–positron pair production, and Section 3.4 explores attosecond and spiral pulse generation, including the formation of spiral electron beams. The final discussion is presented in Section 4. Appendix A provides a detailed description of the controls for the VBL application.

2. Methods

The VBL application at the ELI Beamlines facility utilizes our web-based interactive 3D visualization framework to render simulation datasets (and experimental data in the future). The application runs in a standard web browser and includes support for VR viewing, offering users a novel and immersive way to view the data. Built on an in-house rendering engine making use of the WebGL standard [41], the framework not only renders datasets but also offers simultaneous viewports, textual and numerical information, and a GUI featuring timeline animation controls and layer visibility management. Additionally, it integrates graphical elements powered by D3.js [45] for plotting animated graphs and legends.
The previous version of our VBL application [39] used WebVR [46], which enabled applications to communicate with VR hardware and deliver immersive experiences in a web browser. However, as the experimental WebVR API was deprecated in 2022, it has been largely replaced by its successor, WebXR [42]. Consequently, we rewrote the application’s code to use WebXR, which is significantly more widely supported than WebVR was.

2.1. Data Representation

To effectively visualize simulation data, the system processes and renders four main data types: point particles, 1D lines, 2D textures, and 3D volumes. The data are represented by their spatial positions (XYZ coordinates for particles and grid-based structures for textures and volumes) and by their color, which is mapped to a specific parameter, typically energy or momentum for particles and plasma density or amplitude of electromagnetic fields for textures and volumes. Additionally, for particles, another parameter can be encoded into the alpha channel and used for particle size scale. If particles retain consistent identifiers across time frames, their trajectories can be visualized as 1D lines, providing insight into their motion over time.
A single visualization can include up to four distinct 3D volumetric layers, which can be displayed simultaneously or toggled on and off individually. Different colormaps can be prepared for the volumetric data and adjusted interactively during the visualization runtime.
When a 2D dataset is used, the third (vertical) dimension can represent the particle/texture parameter (which may be the same or different from the parameter mapped to color), creating a pseudo-3D effect. An example of using two different parameters is shown in Section 3.1.3, where the mean energy in a grid cell is represented by color, while density is mapped to vertical height.

2.2. Visualization Workflow

To streamline rendering and ensure consistency across visualizations, our workflow standardizes data transformation, storage, and rendering techniques. Our scripts for data transformation into binary buffers take input data in .h5 format, which is the native format for the PIC codes Smilei [47] or Osiris [48]. This format is structurally similar to .sdf, which is used by another PIC code, EPOCH [49]. Consequently, the preprocessing step often begins by converting user data into .h5 files with a standardized structure. The data are then separated into individual files for different time steps.
To optimize performance, large datasets can be reduced by cropping regions that will not be visualized, skipping grid points, or interpolating data into a less dense grid. Since PIC simulations typically employ high-density grids to maintain numerical precision, the extra resolution is often unnecessary for visualization purposes. Similarly, the number of visualized particles can be reduced either through random filtering, where only a certain percentage of the original data are retained, or selective filtering, such as filtering based on energy.
Before transformation, the input data can be previewed in external software to allow users to better understand their multidimensional structure and identify the most relevant attributes for visualization. The data are then processed by our data transformation tool, and the resulting binary buffers are stored on a web server, acting as the data source for the visualization engine. Additionally, advanced shading and rendering techniques like ambient occlusion [50], which enhances spatial depth by simulating how ambient light diminishes in shaded areas, can be applied on demand to improve realism.
With the data processed, the next step is to configure a scene description for visualization. The data are linked to the visualized layers, and coordinate grids can be added to fit the data. In VR mode, a single viewpoint is used, following the position and direction of the attached HMD. Outside of VR mode, multiple viewpoints can be displayed on the screen, typically a primary interactive viewpoint, shown as the full-background layer, along with smaller windows presenting static viewpoints from specific perspectives (e.g., front or top views). Additionally, various graphical and text elements can be incorporated, such as a visualization title and description, colormaps, legends, and graphs. See Figure 2 for an example. The system utilizes D3.js [45] for rendering graphs and legends and dat.GUI [51] for the user interface, enabling animation controls and layer visibility management.
Lastly, the completed application is uploaded to a web server for online access, or a data server is emulated locally. Once the visualization is rendered and deployed, users can interact with the data through both traditional desktop controls and immersive VR environments using an HMD.

2.3. User Interaction in VR and Non-VR Modes

Outside of VR mode, the application is operated using a mouse and keyboard on a computer screen. Users can navigate within the visualization, zoom in and out, and rotate the view. An interactive GUI panel provides additional controls, allowing users to pause the visualization, adjust the time frame, and toggle individual visualization layers on or off. This panel also influences VR mode, enabling partial external control over the visualization displayed in the HMD. This functionality is particularly useful during guided excursions, where an operator can adjust settings in real time while explaining the visualization to a user inside the HMD. For instance, the operator can toggle layers or select a specific time frame to highlight key aspects of the visualization.
Inside VR mode, the user’s HMD and controllers are continuously tracked, allowing the viewpoint to respond dynamically. Users can move naturally within the visualization by adjusting their head and body position, creating an immersive and seamless interaction (see users operating the VR stations in Figure 3). The VR controllers provide additional functionality, enabling navigation, zooming, and time control. Recently, two new features were introduced to enhance user engagement: horizontal rotation around the center and time manipulation during playback, enabling users to fast-forward or rewind the visualization. These features provide greater control and interactivity, making the VR experience more immersive and dynamic.
The detailed descriptions of the keyboard and VR controller controls are in the Appendix A.

2.4. Future Development

Currently, we rely on manual effort to identify relevant data for visualization from the vast datasets generated by simulations and experiments. A trained individual preprocesses the data and uses several Jupyter notebooks to convert it into binary buffers, set up the visualization scene, and configure elements such as color schemes and animation parameters to produce the final application. This process allows us to create new visualizations from local data at ELI ERIC or from external sources upon agreement. To streamline this workflow, further automation will be necessary in the future, potentially extending to a fully automated process guided by the user. Additionally, feedback from the processed data could be used to optimize subsequent simulations and experiments.
Looking ahead, the growing complexity and volume of data in plasma research point to a future role for artificial intelligence (AI) in data interpretation and adaptive feedback. The foundational neural network model [52] demonstrated how distributed systems can perform associative memory and pattern recognition tasks. This idea was extended in Chapter 11 of ref. [53], which envisioned neural computation for predicting and controlling plasma behavior. Early applications in space plasma contexts used neural networks to forecast solar wind velocities [54]. More recently, AI and machine learning have been applied to laser–plasma accelerators and control systems, showing promise for experimental optimization and data-driven analysis [55,56,57,58,59,60,61]. These developments emphasize the potential value of integrating AI approaches into VBL environments in the future.

2.5. Related VR Approaches

Various approaches have been applied to visualize (laser-)plasma simulation data using VR worldwide. One such system, CompleXcope, has been used to visualize both simulation and experimental data from the Large Helical Device for fusion research in Japan [62,63]. Originally based on the CAVE system [64], CompleXcope projects stereo images onto three walls and the floor, surrounding the user, who wears liquid crystal shutter glasses for an immersive experience [65]. Recently, CompleXcope has been adapted for use with VR HMD [66]. Another approach, PlasmaVR, is being developed at the Instituto Superior Técnico of the University of Lisbon in Portugal [40]. This system provides a 3D representation of plasma simulation data directly inside a VR HMD. Additionally, it offers interactive slicing and annotations through the 3D dataset, allowing users to view heatmaps of selected planes for a more detailed analysis of plasma behavior. Beyond VR, augmented reality has also been explored for plasma physics visualization using HoloLens [67,68].

3. Results

Below, we present various cases of high-intensity laser–matter interaction, categorized by topic, that have been simulated and visualized at the ELI Beamlines facility. The visualizations in the VR mode was tested using Oculus Rift S and HP Reverb G2 HDMs. The presented visualizations are available online [69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79].

3.1. Ion Acceleration

Laser-driven ion acceleration has remarkable potential applications, including medical treatment such as hadron therapy [4,7,80] and proton–boron capture therapy [81,82], nuclear fusion [14,15], use in material sciences and nuclear physics research [83], as a neutron source [84,85], and other areas [5,6,8,86]. Nondestructive testing methods in cultural heritage investigations [87,88,89] and environmental/forensic studies might also benefit from these advancements. Currently, laser-driven ion acceleration is reaching energy levels of hundreds of MeV per nucleon and beyond [13,90,91].

3.1.1. Laser-Driven Proton Acceleration from Cryogenic Hydrogen Target

The visualization in Figure 4a presents data from a 2D PIC simulation of a 9 PW laser pulse (with parameters relevant to the L4 laser at ELI Beamlines facility) interacting with a cryogenic hydrogen target. The laser pulse is depicted in grayscale, electron density in turquoise, and proton energy using a color scale ranging from white (zero energy) to purple (≈400 MeV) and light blue (over 600 MeV). Only protons with energies exceeding 300 MeV at the end of the simulation are tracked, with their positions and energies visualized as dots. Two distinct groups of protons, accelerated by different mechanisms, can be spatially distinguished: protons originating from the target interior, driven by Radiation Pressure Acceleration (RPA) [92], and protons from the target’s rear side, accelerated via the Target Normal Sheath Acceleration (TNSA) mechanism [93,94]. In refs. [95,96], we demonstrated that under our conditions, RPA dominates over TNSA in both maximum energy and number of accelerated protons, a trend clearly observable in the time evolution of this VR visualization. Furthermore, in ref. [95], we analyzed the dependence of these mechanisms on laser intensity, polarization, and target material (using a plastic target), as well as the effects of introducing a short exponential preplasma on the target front side.
Cryogenic hydrogen targets have already been used in experiments involving lower-power and lower-intensity lasers [97,98,99,100], achieving proton energies up to 80 MeV [91].
The visualization in Figure 4a with its time evolution is available online at [69].

3.1.2. Laser-Driven Ion Acceleration from Plastic Target

The visualization in Figure 4b depicts the interaction of a high-intensity laser pulse with a micrometer-thick flat plastic target obtained from a 2D PIC simulation using the EPOCH code [49]. The laser parameters correspond to those of the L3 HAPLS laser at ELI Beamlines facility [101,102,103]. The choice of flat mylar foil corresponds to the standard and widely used experimental scenario. The visualization clearly shows the acceleration of both protons (pink) and carbon ions (green), reaching maximum energies of 150 MeV/nucleon and 40 MeV/nucleon, respectively. Furthermore, different ion acceleration mechanisms can be distinguished: Hole-Boring RPA occurring at the front side of the target, and the dominant TNSA at the rear side. The presented visualization provides a better understanding of the energy, quantity, and directionality of all heavy particles, including the forward-moving accelerated proton and ion cloud/beam, as well as those moving backward. The latter is often overlooked in theoretical and numerical studies but is crucial for assessing potential damage to optical components in the interaction chamber located in the target-front vicinity (i.e., on the “laser side”). The follow-up 3D simulation of this configuration has been used to provide data to radiological protection studies [104] and Monte Carlo (MC) simulations of ELIMAIA user beamline [105,106] in order to demonstrate the typical laser-ion acceleration scenario and beam transport through the ELIMED magnetic transport system and energy selector [105,107]. Adjustments of laser-target parameters are ongoing research, which can enhance key features of ion beams, e.g., including maximum energy, particle number, spatial uniformity, and homogeneity [108,109], as well as reduce ion beam divergence [110].
Experiments using plastic targets have recently achieved comparable levels of proton acceleration, reaching up to 150 MeV [13].
The visualization in Figure 4b with its time evolution is available online at [70].

3.1.3. Collimated Proton Beam via Double-Layer Target with Modulated Interface

The visualization in Figure 5a presents a 2D PIC simulation of a high-intensity steep-front laser pulse (with parameters relevant to a 100 PW-class laser) interacting with a double-layer target featuring a corrugated interface. In ref. [111], we demonstrated that the laser pulse (turquoise scale) drives a relativistic instability exhibiting Rayleigh–Taylor-like [112,113] and Richtmyer–Meshkov-like [114,115] characteristics [116,117,118,119,120,121,122] at the interface between the deuterium layer (blue) and the proton layer (purple to yellow).
As the instability evolves, low-density plasma regions form alongside high-density ion bunches, with their positions determined by the initial interface corrugation. These bunches are then accelerated as compact structures by the laser radiation pressure, reaching energies of several GeV. Additionally, the laser pulse propagates through the low-density regions, generating an enfolding field around the central ion bunch. This field effectively confines the bunch, suppressing perpendicular expansion and leading to the formation of a collimated, quasi-monoenergetic proton beam of high energy (yellow). The presence of this beam is further confirmed in the proton energy spectra near the end of the simulation.
Furthermore, in ref. [111], we compared the performance of a corrugated double-layer target with other simulation configurations, including a double-layer target without interface corrugation and a single-layer pure hydrogen target. Our results demonstrate that the characteristic bunch structure in proton energy spectra and density distribution emerges only in cases where the interface is corrugated.
The visualization in Figure 5a with its time evolution is available online at [71].

3.1.4. Plasma Shutter for Heavy Ion Acceleration Enhancement

The plasma shutter is typically a thin solid foil attached to the front surface of the target with a small gap between them [123,124,125,126]. When a single foil is used without a secondary target, it is also referred to as a plasma aperture [34,127,128]. As the laser pulse transmits through the opaque shutter, it develops a steep-rising front [32], and its peak intensity increases locally at the cost of losing part of its energy. We demonstrated a local intensity enhancement by a factor of 7 [34] and applied similar laser shutter parameters in subsequent research involving a secondary target [33].
In ref. [33], we investigated the application of plasma shutters for heavy ion acceleration driven by a linearly polarized high-intensity laser pulse, relevant to the L3 laser at ELI Beamlines facility. The visualization in Figure 5b presents data from a 3D PIC simulation of a 1 PW laser (red) interacting with a silicon nitride plasma shutter (blue) and a silver target (green). The maximum energy of silver ions increases by 35% (from 115 to 155 MeV/nucleon) when the shutter is included. Moreover, the application of the plasma shutter leads to ion focusing toward the laser axis in the plane perpendicular to the laser polarization, significantly reducing ion beam divergence.
We also compared the effect for a circularly polarized pulse, which resulted in a 44% increase in maximum silver ion energy. Furthermore, we observed the generation of a spiral laser pulse, which is further discussed in Section 3.4.2.
Additionally, we built a prototype of a double shutter and investigated it using a combination of 2D hydrodynamic and PIC simulations. Assuming a sub-nanosecond prepulse, the double shutter scenario increases the maximum energy by 260% (from 64 to 167 MeV/nucleon) compared with the case without a shutter, where the prepulse remains unmitigated and the main target is pre-expanded.
The plasma shutters have been employed in lower-intensity experiments to generate a steep-rising front and increase laser intensity [124,126], and also to reduce the target pre-expansion by sub-ns prepulses, resulting in increased ion energies [123,125]. For the acceleration of silver ions, energy exceeding 20 MeV/nucleon without a shutter was achieved [129] using half the laser intensity and a target 25 times thicker than in our case. This is comparable to the 64 MeV/nucleon reached in our simulation with optimized parameters but without shutter, assuming a target pre-expanded by a 20 ps prepulse. Significant effort is currently being made to improve the prepulse characteristics of laser systems on the ns and ps levels [130]. Improvement of the fs prepulse and the generation of a steep-rising front in the main pulse will follow, where the plasma shutter is expected to play an important role, as demonstrated by our simulations [33].
The visualization in Figure 5b with its time evolution is available online at [72].

3.2. Electron Acceleration

Laser-driven electron acceleration is widely studied for its potential to create compact electron accelerators, with applications ranging from advanced radiation sources [131,132] to investigations of strong-field quantum electrodynamics phenomena [24,133].

3.2.1. Electromagnetic Electron Rings

High-power laser pulse propagation in low-density plasmas is central to various scientific challenges, including electron acceleration [2,3], the development of radiation sources [18,134], and nuclear fusion within the fast ignition concept [135]. For most of these applications, the laser pulse must propagate over extended distances while efficiently transferring energy into the plasma in a controlled way. In this context, much attention has been given to the evolution of the laser beam’s radial profile in a fully ionized plasma, which can develop multifilament and, notably, ring-shaped transverse structures. Ref. [136] demonstrates that these electromagnetic rings can also generate high-energy ring-shaped electron beams.
The visualization in Figure 6a presents a 3D particle-in-cell simulation demonstrating the formation of electromagnetic and electron rings. The laser intensity is displayed in blue, the electron density in red, and the accelerated electrons are represented by a violet-to-yellow colormap. Besides the applications mentioned earlier, understanding the mechanisms behind these ring structures is important for several reasons. First, electromagnetic rings can divert energy from the laser pulse, limiting the efficiency of high-intensity laser–matter interactions. Second, electron beams accelerated in their wake can damage surrounding equipment, such as capillaries used for guiding laser pulses, and generate unwanted radiation. Finally, identifying the conditions that lead to their formation can provide valuable diagnostics for studying high-intensity laser–matter interactions.
The formation of electromagnetic and electron ring structures in laser–plasma interactions has been experimentally observed, and several distinct mechanisms responsible for their origin have been identified [137,138,139,140,141,142].
The visualization in Figure 6a with its time evolution is available online at [73].

3.2.2. Nanoparticle-Assisted Laser Wakefield Acceleration

To bring laser-accelerated electron beams to real-life applications, their stability and quality still need improvement. Producing such beams requires stable electron injection into the plasma wave (wakefield). Among various injection approaches, nanoparticle-triggered electron injection has emerged as a particularly promising mechanism, demonstrating consistent generation of high-quality electron beams in recent experiments [12,143,144]. This method exploits the local field enhancement around the nanoparticle to trigger controlled injection at specific locations within the plasma, offering a potential path toward more reliable, reproducible, and even tunable electron beams suitable for practical applications [17] in medical imaging, radiotherapy, and advanced materials science.
Many of these applications would benefit from high repetition rates, which conventional accelerators struggle to achieve. There are already several kHz laser systems available, offering energies in the range from several to a few tens of mJ. To reach intensities needed for electron acceleration with these systems, researchers must either use few-cycle pulses [142] or rely on small focal spots [145]. The latter was used to reach 50 MeV electrons, which is so far the highest electron energy achieved with a kHz laser. Although, with optimized electron injection, even higher energies may be possible.
Figure 6b presents results from a 3D PIC simulation of electron acceleration driven by a high-intensity laser pulse (displayed in green-blue), with electron injection facilitated by a 100 nm silica nanoparticle. The simulation was performed with a 7 fs, 10 mJ laser pulse focused to an intensity of 7 × 10 18 W / cm 2 . The image captures the acceleration process 300 fs after the laser-nanoparticle interaction, when injection has already occurred. Electrons injected due to this interaction (depicted in pink-orange) form a well-defined bunch inside the wakefield structure, while electrons released during wave breaking (shown in yellow) appear dispersed throughout the surrounding plasma. Wave breaking refers to the process where plasma oscillations become nonlinear and break, similar to ocean waves on a shore, resulting in less controlled electron injection. This visual distinction clearly highlights the superior beam quality achieved through nanoparticle-triggered injection compared with self-injection mechanisms under these simulation conditions.
The visualization in Figure 6b with its time evolution is available online at [74].

3.3. γ -Flash Generation and Electron–Positron Pair Production

The γ -flash radiation has exciting applications in various fields, such as materials science at extreme energy densities [146], γ -ray inspection and imagining [17], photonuclear reactions [147,148,149], neutron sources [150], photonuclear fission [151,152], radiotherapy [153], shock-wave studies [154], quantum technologies [155], and it can provide further understanding of the mechanisms of high-energy astrophysical processes [156,157,158,159,160]. γ -photons are also used for subsequent electron–positron ( e e + ) pair generation [161] (which can be further guided using orthogonal collision with another laser [162,163]).
The possibility of positron source generation by exploiting the QED effects in ultraintense laser–matter interaction has attracted a lot of attention [24]. This is important not only for fundamental research but also for applications, such as the noninvasive positron annihilation spectroscopy of materials [164].

3.3.1. Collimated γ -Flash Emission Along the Target Surface

A visualization of a 3D particle-in-cell simulation of a 14 PW laser (with red and blue representing ± components of the laser electric field) interacting with an iron target (green) is shown in Figure 7a. In ref. [165], we explored the effects of oblique laser incidence, where the incident and reflected parts of the laser pulse shape the electromagnetic field into a regular interference pattern. This field accelerates electrons to GeV energy levels while simultaneously orienting their momentum in the direction parallel to the target surface. As a result, the electrons emit a collimated γ -photon beam (represented with the magenta scale) in the same direction.
In ref. [165], we also analyzed high-order harmonic generation in the vicinity of the target surface within our setup. Additionally, we examined the dependencies of γ -photon emission on various laser parameters, such as incident angle, polarization, power, and duration, as well as target properties, including thickness and preplasma conditions. These findings confirm the robustness of our proposed scheme.
The visualization in Figure 7a with its time evolution is available online at [75].

3.3.2. Electron–Positron Pair Cascade in a Laser-Electron Collision

One widely accepted configuration for cascade pair production of electron–positron pairs is the interaction of seed electrons with multiple colliding laser pulses [24,166]. As the electrons are trapped in the standing wave formed by two colliding laser beams, they emit photons by nonlinear Compton scattering. The photons exposed to the strong laser fields are transformed into electron–positron pairs through the nonlinear Breit–Wheeler process. The newly created particles again emit photons, and the whole process is repeated. However, to initiate the quantum electrodynamics (QED) cascade, the intensity of the order of 10 24 W / cm 2 is needed. Such a high laser intensity can only be achieved by the tight focusing of the laser pulses. As a consequence of tight focusing, the strong ponderomotive force expels seed electrons from the interaction region and thus significantly suppresses or even prevents photon emission and pair production. Recently, we showed that the appropriate choice of laser pulse polarization can overcome this principal obstacle [167]. It is illustrated in Figure 7b, showing the generation of a QED cascade in a collision of two counter-propagating, tightly focused laser pulses with seed electrons initially located in the center of the simulation box. Radial polarization of the colliding laser pulses assures that the seed electrons are present in the interaction region even in the case of tight focusing. This feature allows the QED cascade to develop at 100× (80×) lower laser power compared with the case of traditionally considered circular (linear) polarization.
The visualization in Figure 7b with its time evolution is available online at [76].

3.3.3. Attosecond γ -Ray Flashes and Electron–Positron Pairs in Dyadic Laser Interaction with Microwire

The 3D simulation of visualization shown in Figure 7c consists of three stages. At the initial stage, so-called ‘injection’ stage, a radially polarized laser interacts with a microwire target, ejecting well-defined microbunches of multi-MeV electrons. The laser used is assumed to be a TiSa laser of 25 PW power, focused by an f/4 parabola. The wire consists of lithium, with a diameter of 1.6 μ m and a length of 3.2 μ m. At the second stage, called ‘boosting’, these ejected electron bunches are further accelerated by the radially polarized laser, exceeding the GeV-energy range in high numbers and high collimation. A second 25 PW laser counter-propagates to the driving laser, with linear polarization and a tunable f-number in the range f/0.8–f/20. When the linearly polarized laser interacts with the electron bunches, the so-called ‘collision’ stage occurs. There, for the high f-number cases (f/5–f/20 for the linearly polarized laser), an ultrabright γ -flash is generated (purple dots in Figure 7c) due to the Compton scattering process. The resulting γ -flash consists of a series of attosecond γ -photon pulses, with a divergence of approximately 1 degree. By reducing the f-number, the interaction is dominated by Breit–Wheeler electron–position pair generation. The resulting pairs (orange dots in Figure 7c) during the interaction time reach a density exceeding the solid density level, which was the most dense to ever be observed in the laboratory upon experimental realization of our proposed scheme.
The visualization in Figure 7c with its time evolution is available online at [77].

3.4. Generation of Attosecond and Spiral Pulse

Coherent electromagnetic attosecond pulses have impressive applications such as ultrafast coherent X-ray spectroscopy [168], nonlinear XUV spectroscopy [169,170], and ultrafast X-ray protein nanocrystallography [171].
The spiral pulses and spiral electron beams may play a crucial role in fast ignition [135] and ion acceleration [92].

3.4.1. Coherent Attosecond Pulse Generation

Coherent electromagnetic attosecond pulses are typically facilitated through high-harmonic generation in partially ionized noble gases, where phase-locked harmonics are produced in a train of attosecond pulses. While this method is currently the workhorse of attosecond science, it is limited in radiation intensity due to gas ionization, limiting the maximum driving laser intensity.
High harmonics obtained from relativistic oscillating mirrors [9,20,172,173,174] enable breaking through this limitation, as the plasma electrons conducting laser-driven oscillations are already ionized. Figure 8a shows a coherent attosecond pulse (white and orange colors depicts positive and negative parts of the magnetic field) produced from a relativistic plasma mirror (blue to yellow density scale) moving with constant velocity [175], which can be driven either by charged particle beams [176] or intense laser pulses [18,177].
The visualization in Figure 8a with its time evolution is available online at [78].

3.4.2. Generations of Spiral Laser and Electron Beams

In the visualization shown in Figure 8b, we examine the hole boring of a laser pulse through a silicon nitride foil, identical to the setup in Section 3.1.4, but this time using 3D PIC simulation with a circularly polarized laser pulse and no secondary target. As discussed further in ref. [178], the circularly polarized laser (red) can be decomposed into a radially polarized wave and an azimuthally polarized wave within the hole. The radial polarization component generates spiral electromagnetic waves (red), which, through the Lorentz force, produce a spiral electron beam (blue). This electron beam, in turn, induces a strong quasi-static giga-gauss longitudinal magnetic field.
These spiral structures are inherently 3D phenomena and may play a crucial role in fast ignition [135] and RPA ion acceleration [92]. The structures exhibit rotational motion over time, as seen in the different time frames of the visualization, which are separated by one-quarter of the laser pulse period.
The visualization in Figure 8b with its time evolution is available online at [79].

4. Discussion

In this work, we have presented the Virtual Beamline (VBL) application, an interactive web-based platform for the scientific visualization of high-intensity laser–matter simulations. Developed at ELI Beamlines facility, VBL integrates a custom-built WebGL engine with WebXR-based VR support, providing an immersive and interactive environment for data exploration. It supports two interaction modes: a non-VR mode and a VR mode. The non-VR mode operates entirely within a web browser and does not require any specialized hardware or software. The VR mode provides a fully immersive experience using a standard head-mounted display and its associated software. The framework efficiently processes and renders four main data types: point particles, 1D lines, 2D textures, and 3D volumes, using optimized transformation techniques to ensure smooth visualization.
By utilizing interactive 3D visualization, VBL overcomes the limitations of traditional 2D representations, offering a more comprehensive spatial understanding of complex plasma dynamics. The system supports multilayer rendering and allows real-time manipulation of visualization parameters. Users can dynamically adjust time frames, switch between different data layers, switch colormaps and interactively explore data through moving, zooming and rotation. These interactive features enable researchers to analyze simulation results in greater detail, uncover hidden structures within the data, and better interpret complex plasma behavior. This functionality is particularly beneficial in both scientific analysis and educational outreach, making data exploration more engaging and accessible.
We have demonstrated how modern visualization techniques enhance the study of high-intensity laser–matter interactions, enabling the intuitive and dynamic representation of PIC simulations. The visualization framework has been applied to a variety of high-intensity laser–matter interaction scenarios, including ion acceleration, electron acceleration, γ -flash generation, electron–positron pair production, attosecond and spiral pulse generation. These studies illustrate how VBL enables real-time exploration of complex simulation datasets, enhancing both research capabilities and public engagement with plasma physics.
Our repository of visualizations is hosted online and freely accessible via server [44], and it will continue to expand with new datasets from both simulations and experiments across different research fields. An example of external collaboration utilizing VBL for astrophysical phenomena visualization, based on simulations from ref. [179], was previously demonstrated in the earlier WebVR version of VBL [39]. We plan to continue creating new visualizations based on local simulation and experimental data at ELI ERIC, as well as from external sources upon agreement. As the database grows, this visualization repository will serve as a valuable resource for the user community of ELI ERIC [180] and beyond.

Author Contributions

M.M. wrote the bulk of the manuscript, coordinated the effort to revive the VBL project through a new version, implemented part of the updates, including improved online sharing capabilities and additional features, carried out the simulations and wrote texts in Section 3.1.1, Section 3.1.3, Section 3.1.4, Section 3.3.1 and Section 3.4.2, and designed the visualizations in Section 3.2.2, Section 3.3.2, Section 3.3.3, Section 3.4.1 and Section 3.4.2; J.P.T. implemented part of the updates in the new version of VBL, including WebXR support and additional features, and designed the visualization in Section 3.3.1; M.K. coauthored the previous version of VBL, secured the documentation, scripts and knowhow transfer, and designed the visualizations in Section 3.1.1, Section 3.1.2, Section 3.1.3 and Section 3.1.4; P.V. wrote the text, carried out the simulation and designed the visualization in Section 3.2.1; M.G.Ž., A.Š., M.J., P.H., and M.L. wrote the texts and carried out the simulations in Section 3.1.2, Section 3.2.2, Section 3.3.2, Section 3.3.3 and Section 3.4.1, respectively; S.V.B. provided overall supervision. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

Portions of this research were carried out at the ELI Beamlines Facility, a European user facility operated by the Extreme Light Infrastructure ERIC. The computational time was provided by the supercomputers Sunrise of ELI Beamlines facility and Karolina of IT4Innovations, supported by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic through the e-INFRA CZ (ID:90254). The support of Grant Agency of the Czech Technical University in Prague is appreciated, grant no. SGS22/185/OHK4/3T/14. Martina Greplová Žáková was supported by the Martina Roeselová Memorial Fellowship, provided by NF IOCB TEC-H.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The original visualizations presented in the study are openly available on https://vbl.eli-beams.eu/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).

Acknowledgments

We appreciate the work done on the previous WebVR version of VBL application by the former Virtual Beamline team, namely M. Kecová, P. Janečka, A. Holý, K. Petránek, and J. Grosz during their employment at ELI Beamlines. We appreciate the previous discussions with K. Mima, T. M. Jeong, K. Nishihara, J. Pšikal, O. Klimo, and G. Grittani regarding the simulations used for the visualizations, as well as the administration of the server hosting our webpage by P. Wodecki and previously by J. Majer.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
VBLVirtual Beamline
VRVirtual Reality
HMDHead-Mounted Display
PICParticle-in-cell
AIArtificial intelligence
RPARadiation Pressure Acceleration
TNSATarget Normal Sheath Acceleration
QEDQuantum electrodynamics

Appendix A. Controls of VBL Application

Outside VR mode, navigation is controlled via the keyboard, with W, S, A, and D keys for translational movement and Up and Down Arrow keys or the mouse wheel for zooming. Rotation is controlled using two key pairs, the Q and E keys perform horizontal rotation, while the X and C keys control vertical rotation. Alternatively, the scene can be rotated by clicking and dragging with the left mouse button. The view can be reset to its default orientation by pressing the R key. Temporal navigation is managed using the Left and Right Arrow keys, which shift the visualization to the previous or next timeframe, respectively. The animation can be toggled (play/pause) using the Enter key. Individual visualization layers can be enabled or disabled using the number keys 0–9. The H and P keys toggle the display of the description and additional parameters. The Space key activates VR mode.
Inside VR mode, zooming is controlled via the A and B buttons on the VR controller, while translational movement is executed through a drag-and-pull motion with the right trigger. The Y button on the left controller pauses the visualization, and step-by-step time progression is managed via the left joystick. During playback, pushing the left joystick forward accelerates time, while pulling it backward rewinds it. Rotation in the horizontal plane is controlled by moving the right joystick left or right.

References

  1. Danson, C.N.; Haefner, C.; Bromage, J.; Butcher, T.; Chanteloup, J.C.F.; Chowdhury, E.A.; Galvanauskas, A.; Gizzi, L.A.; Hein, J.; Hillier, D.I.; et al. Petawatt and exawatt class lasers worldwide. High Power Laser Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, e54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Tajima, T.; Dawson, J.M. Laser Electron Accelerator. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1979, 43, 267–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Esarey, E.; Schroeder, C.B.; Leemans, W.P. Physics of laser-driven plasma-based electron accelerators. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2009, 81, 1229–1285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Bulanov, S.V.; Esirkepov, T.; Khoroshkov, V.S.; Kuznetsov, A.V.; Pegoraro, F. Oncological hadrontherapy with laser ion accelerators. Phys. Lett. Sect. Gen. At. Solid State Phys. 2002, 299, 240–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Daido, H.; Nishiuchi, M.; Pirozhkov, A.S. Review of laser-driven ion sources and their applications. Rep. Prog. Phys. 2012, 75, 056401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Macchi, A.; Borghesi, M.; Passoni, M. Ion acceleration by superintense laser-plasma interaction. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2013, 85, 751–793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Bulanov, S.V.; Wilkens, J.J.; Esirkepov, T.Z.; Korn, G.; Kraft, G.; Kraft, S.D.; Molls, M.; Khoroshkov, V.S. Laser ion acceleration for hadron therapy. Physics-Uspekhi 2014, 57, 1149–1179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Passoni, M.; Arioli, F.M.; Cialfi, L.; Dellasega, D.; Fedeli, L.; Formenti, A.; Giovannelli, A.C.; Maffini, A.; Mirani, F.; Pazzaglia, A.; et al. Advanced laser-driven ion sources and their applications in materials and nuclear science. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 2019, 62, 014022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Teubner, U.; Gibbon, P. High-order harmonics from laser-irradiated plasma surfaces. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2009, 81, 445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Krausz, F.; Ivanov, M. Attosecond physics. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2009, 81, 163–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Gonsalves, A.J.; Nakamura, K.; Daniels, J.; Benedetti, C.; Pieronek, C.; de Raadt, T.C.H.; Steinke, S.; Bin, J.H.; Bulanov, S.S.; van Tilborg, J.; et al. Petawatt Laser Guiding and Electron Beam Acceleration to 8 GeV in a Laser-Heated Capillary Discharge Waveguide. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2019, 122, 084801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Aniculaesei, C.; Ha, T.; Yoffe, S.; Labun, L.; Milton, S.; McCary, E.; Spinks, M.M.; Quevedo, H.J.; Labun, O.Z.; Sain, R.; et al. The acceleration of a high-charge electron bunch to 10 GeV in a 10-cm nanoparticle-assisted wakefield accelerator. Matter Radiat. Extrem. 2023, 9, 014001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Ziegler, T.; Göthel, I.; Assenbaum, S.; Bernert, C.; Brack, F.E.; Cowan, T.E.; Dover, N.P.; Gaus, L.; Kluge, T.; Kraft, S.; et al. Laser-driven high-energy proton beams from cascaded acceleration regimes. Nat. Phys. 2024, 20, 1211–1216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Roth, M.; Cowan, T.E.; Key, M.H.; Hatchett, S.P.; Brown, C.; Fountain, W.; Johnson, J.; Pennington, D.M.; Snavely, R.A.; Wilks, S.C.; et al. Fast ignition by intense laser-accelerated proton beams. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2001, 86, 436–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Atzeni, S.; Temporal, M.; Honrubia, J.J. A first analysis of fast ignition of precompressed ICF fuel by laser-accelerated protons. Nucl. Fusion 2002, 42, L1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Romagnani, L.; Fuchs, J.; Borghesi, M.; Antici, P.; Audebert, P.; Ceccherini, F.; Cowan, T.; Grismayer, T.; Kar, S.; Macchi, A.; et al. Dynamics of Electric Fields Driving the Laser Acceleration of Multi-MeV Protons. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2005, 95, 195001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Albert, F.; Thomas, A.G.R. Applications of laser wakefield accelerator-based light sources. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 2016, 58, 103001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bulanov, S.V.; Esirkepov, T.Z.; Kando, M.; Pirozhkov, A.S.; Rosanov, N.N. Relativistic mirrors in plasmas. Novel results and perspectives. Physics-Uspekhi 2013, 56, 429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Pirozhkov, A.S.; Esirkepov, T.Z.; Pikuz, T.A.; Faenov, A.Y.; Ogura, K.; Hayashi, Y.; Kotaki, H.; Ragozin, E.N.; Neely, D.; Kiriyama, H.; et al. Burst intensification by singularity emitting radiation in multi-stream flows. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 17968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Lamač, M.; Mima, K.; Nejdl, J.; Chaulagain, U.; Bulanov, S.V. Anomalous Relativistic Emission from Self-Modulated Plasma Mirrors. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2023, 131, 205001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Mourou, G.A.; Tajima, T.; Bulanov, S.V. Optics in the relativistic regime. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2006, 78, 309–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Marklund, M.; Shukla, P.K. Nonlinear collective effects in photon-photon and photon-plasma interactions. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2006, 78, 591–640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Di Piazza, A.; Müller, C.; Hatsagortsyan, K.Z.; Keitel, C.H. Extremely high-intensity laser interactions with fundamental quantum systems. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2012, 84, 1177–1228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Gonoskov, A.; Blackburn, T.G.; Marklund, M.; Bulanov, S.S. Charged particle motion and radiation in strong electromagnetic fields. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2022, 94, 045001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Burke, D.L.; Field, R.C.; Horton-Smith, G.; Spencer, J.E.; Walz, D.; Berridge, S.C.; Bugg, W.M.; Shmakov, K.; Weidemann, A.W.; Bula, C.; et al. Positron Production in Multiphoton Light-by-Light Scattering. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1997, 79, 1626–1629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ridgers, C.P.; Brady, C.S.; Duclous, R.; Kirk, J.G.; Bennett, K.; Arber, T.D.; Robinson, A.P.L.; Bell, A.R. Dense Electron-Positron Plasmas and Ultraintense γ rays from Laser-Irradiated Solids. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2012, 108, 165006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Nakamura, T.; Koga, J.K.; Esirkepov, T.Z.; Kando, M.; Korn, G.; Bulanov, S.V. High-Power γ-Ray Flash Generation in Ultraintense Laser-Plasma Interactions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2012, 108, 195001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Lezhnin, K.V.; Sasorov, P.V.; Korn, G.; Bulanov, S.V. High power gamma flare generation in multi-petawatt laser interaction with tailored targets. Phys. Plasmas 2018, 25, 123105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Vyskočil, J.; Gelfer, E.; Klimo, O. Inverse Compton scattering from solid targets irradiated by ultra-short laser pulses in the 1022–1023 W/cm2 regime. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 2020, 62, 064002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Hadjisolomou, P.; Jeong, T.M.; Kolenaty, D.; Macleod, A.J.; Olšovcová, V.; Versaci, R.; Ridgers, C.P.; Bulanov, S.V. Gamma-flash generation in multi-petawatt laser–matter interactions. Phys. Plasmas 2023, 30, 093103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Pirozhkov, A.S.; Sagisaka, A.; Ogura, K.; Vishnyakov, E.A.; Shatokhin, A.N.; Armstrong, C.D.; Esirkepov, T.Z.; Izquierdo, B.G.; Pikuz, T.A.; Hadjisolomou, P.; et al. Demonstration of The Brightest Nano-size Gamma Source. arXiv 2024, arXiv:2410.06537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Vshivkov, V.A.; Naumova, N.M.; Pegoraro, F.; Bulanov, S.V. Nonlinear electrodynamics of the interaction of ultra-intense laser pulses with a thin foil. Phys. Plasmas 1998, 5, 2727–2741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Matys, M.; Bulanov, S.V.; Kucharik, M.; Jirka, M.; Nikl, J.; Kecova, M.; Proska, J.; Psikal, J.; Korn, G.; Klimo, O. Design of plasma shutters for improved heavy ion acceleration by ultra-intense laser pulses. New J. Phys. 2022, 24, 113046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Jirka, M.; Klimo, O.; Matys, M. Relativistic plasma aperture for laser intensity enhancement. Phys. Rev. Res. 2021, 3, 033175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Dover, N.P.; Ziegler, T.; Assenbaum, S.; Bernert, C.; Bock, S.; Brack, F.E.; Cowan, T.E.; Ditter, E.J.; Garten, M.; Gaus, L.; et al. Enhanced ion acceleration from transparency-driven foils demonstrated at two ultraintense laser facilities. Light Sci. Appl. 2023, 12, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Li, C.; Wang, Y.; Chen, Z.; Kang, Y.; Sun, M.; Qin, L.; Eliasson, B.; Yan, X. Generation of 100-TW half-cycle zeptosecond x-ray pulses in the cascaded regime. Phys. Rev. Appl. 2025, 23, 024047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kim, K.; Carlis, J.V.; Keefe, D.F. Comparison techniques utilized in spatial 3D and 4D data visualizations: A survey and future directions. Comput. Graph. 2017, 67, 138–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Igarashi, H.; Kido, D.; Ishii, Y.; Niwa, Y.; Okamoto, A.; Kimura, M. Visualization of four-dimensional X-ray absorption fine structure data using a virtual reality system. J. Synchrotron Radiat. 2025, 32, 162–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Danielova, M.; Janecka, P.; Grosz, J.; Holy, A. Interactive 3D Visualizations of Laser Plasma Experiments on the Web and in VR. In Proceedings of the EuroVis 2019—Posters, Porto, Portugal, 3–7 June 2019; The Eurographics Association: Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Verdelho Trindade, N.; Amaro, Ó.; Brás, D.; Gonçalves, D.; Madeiras Pereira, J.; Ferreira, A. Visualizing Plasma Physics Simulations in Immersive Environments. In Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Computer Vision, Imaging and Computer Graphics Theory and Applications—IVAPP, INSTICC, Rome, Italy, 27–29 February 2024; SciTePress: Setúbal, Portugal, 2024; pp. 645–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. WebGL. Available online: https://www.khronos.org/webgl/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  42. WebXR. Available online: https://immersive-web.github.io/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  43. Kelling, J.; Bolea, V.; Bussmann, M.; Checkervarty, A.; Debus, A.; Ebert, J.; Eisenhauer, G.; Gutta, V.; Kesselheim, S.; Klasky, S.; et al. The Artificial Scientist—In-transit Machine Learning of Plasma Simulations. arXiv 2025, arXiv:2501.03383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Virtual Beamline. Available online: https://vbl.eli-beams.eu/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  45. D3.js. Available online: https://d3js.org/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  46. WebVR. Available online: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/WebVR_API (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  47. Derouillat, J.; Beck, A.; Pérez, F.; Vinci, T.; Chiaramello, M.; Grassi, A.; Flé, M.; Bouchard, G.; Plotnikov, I.; Aunai, N.; et al. Smilei: A collaborative, open-source, multi-purpose particle-in-cell code for plasma simulation. Comput. Phys. Commun. 2018, 222, 351–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Fonseca, R.A.; Silva, L.O.; Tsung, F.S.; Decyk, V.K.; Lu, W.; Ren, C.; Mori, W.B.; Deng, S.; Lee, S.; Katsouleas, T.; et al. OSIRIS: A Three-Dimensional, Fully Relativistic Particle in Cell Code for Modeling Plasma Based Accelerators. In Proceedings of the Computational Science—ICCS 2002, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 21–24 April 2002; Sloot, P.M.A., Hoekstra, A.G., Tan, C.J.K., Dongarra, J.J., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2002; pp. 342–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Arber, T.D.; Bennett, K.; Brady, C.S.; Lawrence-Douglas, A.; Ramsay, M.G.; Sircombe, N.J.; Gillies, P.; Evans, R.G.; Schmitz, H.; Bell, A.R.; et al. Contemporary particle-in-cell approach to laser-plasma modelling. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 2015, 57, 113001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Miller, G. Efficient algorithms for local and global accessibility shading. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, Orlando, FL, USA, 24–29 July 1994; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 1994; pp. 319–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. dat.GUI. Available online: https://github.com/dataarts/dat.gui (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  52. Hopfield, J.J. Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1982, 79, 2554–2558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Tajima, T. Computational Plasma Physics: With Applications to Fusion and Astrophysics; Frontiers in Physics; Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA, USA, 1989; Volume 72. [Google Scholar]
  54. Hernandez, J.V.; Tajima, T.; Horton, W. Neural net forecasting for geomagnetic activity. Geophys. Res. Lett. 1993, 20, 2707–2710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Shalloo, R.J.; Dann, S.J.D.; Gruse, J.N.; Underwood, C.I.D.; Antoine, A.F.; Arran, C.; Backhouse, M.; Baird, C.D.; Balcazar, M.D.; Bourgeois, N.; et al. Automation and control of laser wakefield accelerators using Bayesian optimization. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 6355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Jalas, S.; Kirchen, M.; Messner, P.; Winkler, P.; Hübner, L.; Dirkwinkel, J.; Schnepp, M.; Lehe, R.; Maier, A.R. Bayesian Optimization of a Laser-Plasma Accelerator. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2021, 126, 104801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Karniadakis, G.E.; Kevrekidis, I.G.; Lu, L.; Perdikaris, P.; Wang, S.; Yang, L. Physics-informed machine learning. Nat. Rev. Phys. 2021, 3, 422–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Döpp, A.; Eberle, C.; Howard, S.; Irshad, F.; Lin, J.; Streeter, M. Data-driven science and machine learning methods in laser–plasma physics. High Power Laser Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, e55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Feister, S.; Cassou, K.; Dann, S.; Döpp, A.; Gauron, P.; Gonsalves, A.J.; Joglekar, A.; Marshall, V.; Neveu, O.; Schlenvoigt, H.P.; et al. Control systems and data management for high-power laser facilities. High Power Laser Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, e56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Goodman, J.; King, M.; Dolier, E.J.; Wilson, R.; Gray, R.J.; McKenna, P. Optimization and control of synchrotron emission in ultraintense laser–solid interactions using machine learning. High Power Laser Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, e34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Loughran, B.; Streeter, M.J.V.; Ahmed, H.; Astbury, S.; Balcazar, M.; Borghesi, M.; Bourgeois, N.; Curry, C.B.; Dann, S.J.D.; DiIorio, S.; et al. Automated control and optimization of laser-driven ion acceleration. High Power Laser Sci. Eng. 2023, 11, e35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Ohtani, H.; Kageyama, A.; Tamura, Y.; Ishiguro, S.; Shohji, M. Integrated Visualization of Simulation Results and Experimental Devices in Virtual-Reality Space. Plasma Fusion Res. 2011, 6, 2406027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Ohtani, H.; Shoji, M.; Ohno, N.; Suzuki, Y.; Ishiguro, S.; Kageyama, A.; Tamura, Y. Visualization of Dust Particle Data with Plasma Simulation Results Using Virtual-Reality System. Contrib. Plasma Phys. 2016, 56, 692–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Cruz-Neira, C.; Sandin, D.J.; DeFanti, T.A. Surround-screen projection-based virtual reality. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, Anaheim, CA, USA, 2–6 August 1993; pp. 135–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Ohtani, H.; Masuzaki, S.; Ogawa, K.; Ishiguro, S. Virtual-reality visualization of loss points of 1 MeV tritons in the Large Helical Device, LHD. J. Vis. 2021, 25, 281–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Ohno, N.; Kageyama, A. VOIR: Virtual Reality Visualization Software for Large-Scale Simulations. Plasma Fusion Res. 2024, 19, 1401024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Foss, G.; Solis, A.; Bhadsavle, S.; Horton, W.; Leonard, L. Plasma Simulation Data Through the Hololens. In Proceedings of the Practice and Experience on Advanced Research Computing, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 22–26 July 2018; pp. 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Mathur, M.; Brozovich, J.M.; Rausch, M.K. A brief note on building augmented reality models for scientific visualization. Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 2023, 213, 103851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Laser-Driven Proton Acceleration from Cryogenic Hydrogen Target. Available online: https://vbl.eli-beams.eu/mm-track/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  70. Laser-Driven Ion Acceleration from Plastic Target. Available online: https://vbl.eli-beams.eu/mz-elimaia/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  71. Collimated Proton Beam via Double-Layer Target with Modulated Interface. Available online: https://vbl.eli-beams.eu/mm-bunch/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  72. Plasma Shutter for Heavy Ion Acceleration Enhancement. Available online: https://vbl.eli-beams.eu/mm-shutter/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  73. Electromagnetic-Electron Rings. Available online: https://vbl.eli-beams.eu/pv-rings/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  74. Nanoparticle-Assisted Laser Wakefield Acceleration. Available online: https://vbl.eli-beams.eu/as-lwfa/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  75. Collimated γ-Flash Emission Along the Target Surface. Available online: https://vbl.eli-beams.eu/mm-gamma/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  76. Electron-Positron Pair Cascade in a Laser-Electron Collision. Available online: https://vbl.eli-beams.eu/mj-colliding/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  77. Attosecond Gamma-Ray Flashes and Electron-Positron Pairs in Dyadic Laser Interaction with Micro-Wire. Available online: https://vbl.eli-beams.eu/ph-wire/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  78. Coherent Attosecond Pulse Generation. Available online: https://vbl.eli-beams.eu/ml-atto/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  79. Generations of Spiral Laser and Electron Beams. Available online: https://vbl.eli-beams.eu/mm-spiral/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  80. Tajima, T. Prospect for compact medical laser accelerators. J. Jpn. Soc. Ther. Radiol. Oncol. 1997, 9, 83–85. [Google Scholar]
  81. Cirrone, G.; Manti, L.; Margarone, D.; Petringa, G.; Giuffrida, L.; Minopoli, A.; Picciotto, A.; Russo, G.; Cammarata, F.; Pisciotta, P.; et al. First experimental proof of Proton Boron Capture Therapy (PBCT) to enhance protontherapy effectiveness. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 1141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Istokskaia, V.; Tosca, M.; Giuffrida, L.; Psikal, J.; Grepl, F.; Kantarelou, V.; Stancek, S.; Di Siena, S.; Hadjikyriacou, A.; McIlvenny, A.; et al. A multi-MeV alpha particle source via proton-boron fusion driven by a 10-GW tabletop laser. Commun. Phys. 2023, 6, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Nishiuchi, M.; Sakaki, H.; Esirkepov, T.Z.; Nishio, K.; Pikuz, T.A.; Faenov, A.Y.; Skobelev, I.Y.; Orlandi, R.; Sako, H.; Pirozhkov, A.S.; et al. Acceleration of highly charged GeV Fe ions from a low-Z substrate by intense femtosecond laser. Phys. Plasmas 2015, 22, 033107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Norreys, P.A.; Fews, A.P.; Beg, F.N.; Bell, A.R.; Dangor, A.E.; Lee, P.; Nelson, M.B.; Schmidt, H.; Tatarakis, M.; Cable, M.D. Neutron production from picosecond laser irradiation of deuterated targets at intensities of 145°. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 1998, 40, 175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Horný, V.; Chen, S.N.; Davoine, X.; Lelasseux, V.; Gremillet, L.; Fuchs, J. High-flux neutron generation by laser-accelerated ions from single- and double-layer targets. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 19767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Borghesi, M.; Bigongiari, A.; Kar, S.; Macchi, A.; Romagnani, L.; Audebert, P.; Fuchs, J.; Toncian, T.; Willi, O.; Bulanov, S.; et al. Laser-driven proton acceleration: Source optimization and radiographic applications. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 2008, 50, 124040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Mirani, F.; Maffini, A.; Casamichiela, F.; Pazzaglia, A.; Formenti, A.; Dellasega, D.; Russo, V.; Vavassori, D.; Bortot, D.; Huault, M.; et al. Integrated quantitative PIXE analysis and EDX spectroscopy using a laser-driven particle source. Sci. Adv. 2021, 7, eabc8660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Barberio, M.; Antici, P. Laser-PIXE using laser-accelerated proton beams. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 6855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Passoni, M.; Fedeli, L.; Mirani, F. Superintense laser-driven ion beam analysis. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 9202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Higginson, A.; Gray, R.J.; King, M.; Dance, R.J.; Williamson, S.D.; Butler, N.M.; Wilson, R.; Capdessus, R.; Armstrong, C.; Green, J.S.; et al. Near-100 MeV protons via a laser-driven transparency-enhanced hybrid acceleration scheme. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Rehwald, M.; Assenbaum, S.; Bernert, C.; Brack, F.E.; Bussmann, M.; Cowan, T.E.; Curry, C.B.; Fiuza, F.; Garten, M.; Gaus, L.; et al. Ultra-short pulse laser acceleration of protons to 80 MeV from cryogenic hydrogen jets tailored to near-critical density. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 4009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Esirkepov, T.; Borghesi, M.; Bulanov, S.V.; Mourou, G.; Tajima, T. Highly efficient relativistic-ion generation in the laser-piston regime. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2004, 92, 175003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Wilks, S.C.; Langdon, A.B.; Cowan, T.E.; Roth, M.; Singh, M.; Hatchett, S.; Key, M.H.; Pennington, D.; MacKinnon, A.; Snavely, R.A. Energetic proton generation in ultra-intense laser–solid interactions. Phys. Plasmas 2001, 8, 542–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Snavely, R.A.; Key, M.H.; Hatchett, S.P.; Cowan, T.E.; Roth, M.; Phillips, T.W.; Stoyer, M.A.; Henry, E.A.; Sangster, T.C.; Singh, M.S.; et al. Intense High-Energy Proton Beams from Petawatt-Laser Irradiation of Solids. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2000, 85, 2945–2948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Psikal, J.; Matys, M. Dominance of hole-boring radiation pressure acceleration regime with thin ribbon of ionized solid hydrogen. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 2018, 60, 044003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Matys, M.; Psikal, J.; Nishihara, K.; Klimo, O.; Jirka, M.; Valenta, P.; Bulanov, S.V. High-Quality Laser-Accelerated Ion Beams from Structured Targets. Photonics 2023, 10, 61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Garcia, S.; Chatain, D.; Perin, J. Continuous production of a thin ribbon of solid hydrogen. Laser Part. Beams 2014, 32, 569–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Margarone, D.; Velyhan, A.; Dostal, J.; Ullschmied, J.; Perin, J.P.; Chatain, D.; Garcia, S.; Bonnay, P.; Pisarczyk, T.; Dudzak, R.; et al. Proton acceleration driven by a nanosecond laser from a cryogenic thin solid-hydrogen ribbon. Phys. Rev. X 2016, 6, 041030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Polz, J.; Robinson, A.P.L.; Kalinin, A.; Becker, G.A.; Fraga, R.A.C.; Hellwing, M.; Hornung, M.; Keppler, S.; Kessler, A.; Klöpfel, D.; et al. Efficient Laser-Driven Proton Acceleration from a Cryogenic Solid Hydrogen Target. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 16534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Chagovets, T.; Viswanathan, J.; Tryus, M.; Grepl, F.; Velyhan, A.; Stancek, S.; Giuffrida, L.; Schillaci, F.; Cupal, J.; Koubikova, L.; et al. A Cryogenic Hydrogen Ribbon for Laser Driven Proton Acceleration at Hz-Level Repetition Rate. Front. Phys. 2022, 9, 754423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Sistrunk, E.; Spinka, T.; Bayramian, A.; Betts, S.; Bopp, R.; Buck, S.; Charron, K.; Cupal, J.; Deri, R.; Drouin, M.; et al. All diode-pumped, high-repetition-rate advanced petawatt laser system (HAPLS). In Proceedings of the CLEO: Science and Innovations, San Jose, CA, USA, 14–19 May 2017; Optica Publishing Group: Washington, DC, USA, 2017; p. STh1L–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Haefner, C.; Bayramian, A.; Betts, S.; Bopp, R.; Buck, S.; Cupal, J.; Drouin, M.; Erlandson, A.; Horáček, J.; Horner, J.; et al. High average power, diode pumped petawatt laser systems: A new generation of lasers enabling precision science and commercial applications. In Proceedings of the Research Using Extreme Light: Entering New Frontiers with Petawatt-Class Lasers III, Prague, Czech Republic, 24–26 April 2017; SPIE: Bellingham, WA, USA, 2017; Volume 10241, p. 1024102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. The L3 Laser System Called HAPLS (The High-Repetition-Rate Advanced Petawatt Laser System). Available online: https://up.eli-laser.eu/laser/l3-1101562735 (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  104. Bechet, S.; Versaci, R.; Rollet, S.; Olsovcova, V.; Fajstavr, A.; Zakova, M.; Margarone, D. Radiation protection of a proton beamline at ELI-Beamlines. J. Instrum. 2016, 11, C12019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Margarone, D.; Cirrone, G.P.; Cuttone, G.; Amico, A.; Andò, L.; Borghesi, M.; Bulanov, S.S.; Bulanov, S.V.; Chatain, D.; Fajstavr, A.; et al. ELIMAIA: A laser-driven ion accelerator for multidisciplinary applications. Quantum Beam Sci. 2018, 2, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. ELIMAIA User Beamline. Available online: https://up.eli-laser.eu/equipment/elimaia-854589514 (accessed on 27 April 2025).
  107. Schillaci, F.; Cirrone, G.; Cuttone, G.; Maggiore, M.; Andó, L.; Amato, A.; Costa, M.; Gallo, G.; Korn, G.; Larosa, G.; et al. Design of the ELIMAIA ion collection system. J. Instrum. 2015, 10, T12001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Margarone, D.; Klimo, O.; Kim, I.; Prokupek, J.; Limpouch, J.; Jeong, T.; Mocek, T.; Pšikal, J.; Kim, H.; Proška, J.; et al. Laser-driven proton acceleration enhancement by nanostructured foils. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2012, 109, 234801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Margarone, D.; Kim, I.J.; Psikal, J.; Kaufman, J.; Mocek, T.; Choi, I.W.; Stolcova, L.; Proska, J.; Choukourov, A.; Melnichuk, I.; et al. Laser-driven high-energy proton beam with homogeneous spatial profile from a nanosphere target. Phys. Rev. Spec. Top.-Accel. Beams 2015, 18, 071304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Zakova, M.G.; Psikal, J.; Schillaci, F.; Margarone, D. Improving laser-accelerated proton beam divergence by electric and magnetic fields induced in flat channel-like targets. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 2021, 63, 085005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Matys, M.; Nishihara, K.; Kecova, M.; Psikal, J.; Korn, G.; Bulanov, S.V. Laser-driven generation of collimated quasi-monoenergetic proton beam using double-layer target with modulated interface. High Energy Density Phys. 2020, 36, 100844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Rayleigh, L. Investigation of the character of the equilibrium of an incompressible heavy fluid of variable density. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 1882, 14, 170–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Taylor, G. The instability of liquid surfaces when accelerated in a direction perpendicular to their planes. I. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A Math. Phys. Sci. 1950, 201, 192–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Richtmyer, R.D. Taylor instability in shock acceleration of compressible fluids. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 1960, 13, 297–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Meshkov, E.E. Instability of the interface of two gases accelerated by a shock wave. Fluid Dyn. 1969, 4, 101–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Wouchuk, J.G.; Nishihara, K. Linear perturbation growth at a shocked interface. Phys. Plasmas 1996, 3, 3761–3776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Wouchuk, J.G.; Nishihara, K. Asymptotic growth in the linear Richtmyer-Meshkov instability. Phys. Plasmas 1997, 4, 1028–1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Nishihara, K.; Wouchuk, J.G.; Matsuoka, C.; Ishizaki, R.; Zhakhovsky, V.V. Richtmyer-Meshkov instability: Theory of linear and nonlinear evolution. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 2010, 368, 1769–1807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Mohseni, F.; Mendoza, M.; Succi, S.; Herrmann, H.J. Relativistic effects on the Richtmyer-Meshkov instability. Phys. Rev. D—Part. Fields Gravit. Cosmol. 2014, 90, 125028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Matsuoka, C.; Nishihara, K.; Sano, T. Nonlinear Dynamics of Non-uniform Current-Vortex Sheets in Magnetohydrodynamic Flows. J. Nonlinear Sci. 2017, 27, 531–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Zhou, Y. Rayleigh–Taylor and Richtmyer–Meshkov instability induced flow, turbulence, and mixing. I. Phys. Rep. 2017, 720–722, 1–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Zhou, Y.; Clark, T.T.; Clark, D.S.; Gail Glendinning, S.; Aaron Skinner, M.; Huntington, C.M.; Hurricane, O.A.; Dimits, A.M.; Remington, B.A. Turbulent mixing and transition criteria of flows induced by hydrodynamic instabilities. Phys. Plasmas 2019, 26, 080901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Reed, S.A.; Matsuoka, T.; Bulanov, S.; Tampo, M.; Chvykov, V.; Kalintchenko, G.; Rousseau, P.; Yanovsky, V.; Kodama, R.; Litzenberg, D.W.; et al. Relativistic plasma shutter for ultraintense laser pulses. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2009, 94, 201117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Palaniyappan, S.; Hegelich, B.M.; Wu, H.C.; Jung, D.; Gautier, D.C.; Yin, L.; Albright, B.J.; Johnson, R.P.; Shimada, T.; Letzring, S.; et al. Dynamics of relativistic transparency and optical shuttering in expanding overdense plasmas. Nat. Phys. 2012, 8, 763–769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Wei, W.Q.; Yuan, X.H.; Fang, Y.; Ge, Z.Y.; Ge, X.L.; Yang, S.; Li, Y.F.; Liao, G.Q.; Zhang, Z.; Liu, F.; et al. Plasma optical shutter in ultraintense laser-foil interaction. Phys. Plasmas 2017, 24, 113111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Wei, W.Q.; Wang, Y.; Ge, X.L.; Deng, Y.Q.; Zhang, S.Z.; Wan, F.; Li, J.X.; Zhao, Y.T.; Yuan, X.H. Dynamics and manipulation of ultrashort laser pulses via plasma shutter. Phys. Plasmas 2025, 32, 013109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Gonzalez-Izquierdo, B.; Gray, R.; King, M.; Dance, R.; Wilson, R.; McCreadie, J.; Butler, N.; Capdessus, R.; Hawkes, S.; Green, J.; et al. Optically controlled dense current structures driven by relativistic plasma aperture-induced diffraction. Nat. Phys. 2016, 12, 505–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Gonzalez-Izquierdo, B.; King, M.; Gray, R.; Wilson, R.; Dance, R.; Powell, H.; Maclellan, D.; McCreadie, J.; Butler, N.; Hawkes, S.; et al. Towards optical polarization control of laser-driven proton acceleration in foils undergoing relativistic transparency. Nat. Commun. 2016, 7, 12891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Nishiuchi, M.; Dover, N.P.; Hata, M.; Sakaki, H.; Kondo, K.; Lowe, H.F.; Miyahara, T.; Kiriyama, H.; Koga, J.K.; Iwata, N.; et al. Dynamics of laser-driven heavy-ion acceleration clarified by ion charge states. Phys. Rev. Res. 2020, 2, 033081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Kiriyama, H.; Miyasaka, Y.; Kon, A.; Nishiuchi, M.; Sagisaka, A.; Sasao, H.; Pirozhkov, A.S.; Fukuda, Y.; Ogura, K.; Kondo, K.; et al. Laser Output Performance and Temporal Quality Enhancement at the J-KAREN-P Petawatt Laser Facility. Photonics 2023, 10, 997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Corde, S.; Phuoc, K.T.; Lambert, G.; Fitour, R.; Malka, V.; Rousse, A.; Beck, A.; Lefebvre, E. Femtosecond x rays from laser-plasma accelerators. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2013, 85, 1–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Albert, F.; Thomas, A.G.R.; Mangles, S.P.D.; Banerjee, S.; Corde, S.; Flacco, A.; Litos, M.; Neely, D.; Vieira, J.; Najmudin, Z.; et al. Laser wakefield accelerator based light sources: Potential applications and requirements. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 2014, 56, 084015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Yu, T.P.; Liu, K.; Zhao, J.; Zhu, X.L.; Lu, Y.; Cao, Y.; Zhang, H.; Shao, F.Q.; Sheng, Z.M. Bright X/γ-ray emission and lepton pair production by strong laser fields: A review. Rev. Mod. Plasma Phys. 2024, 8, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Pirozhkov, A.S.; Kando, M.; Ahmed, H.; Fukuda, Y.; Kando, M.; Kiriyama, H.; Sagisaka, A.; Kawase, K.; Kotaki, H.; Hayashi, Y.; et al. Soft-X-Ray Harmonic Comb from Relativistic Electron Spikes. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2012, 108, 135004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Tabak, M.; Hammer, J.; Glinsky, M.E.; Kruer, W.L.; Wilks, S.C.; Woodworth, J.; Campbell, E.M.; Perry, M.D.; Mason, R.J. Ignition and high gain with ultrapowerful lasers. Phys. Plasmas 1994, 1, 1626–1634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Valenta, P.; Grittani, G.M.; Lazzarini, C.M.; Klimo, O.; Bulanov, S.V. On the electromagnetic-electron rings originating from the interaction of high-power short-pulse laser and underdense plasma. Phys. Plasmas 2021, 28, 122104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Krushelnick, K.; Ting, A.; Moore, C.I.; Burris, H.R.; Esarey, E.; Sprangle, P.; Baine, M. Plasma Channel Formation and Guiding during High Intensity Short Pulse Laser Plasma Experiments. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1997, 78, 4047–4050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Kaganovich, D.; Gordon, D.F.; Ting, A. Observation of Large-Angle Quasimonoenergetic Electrons from a Laser Wakefield. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2008, 100, 215002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Pollock, B.B.; Tsung, F.S.; Albert, F.; Shaw, J.L.; Clayton, C.E.; Davidson, A.; Lemos, N.; Marsh, K.A.; Pak, A.; Ralph, J.E.; et al. Formation of Ultrarelativistic Electron Rings from a Laser-Wakefield Accelerator. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2015, 115, 055004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  140. Yang, X.; Brunetti, E.; Gil, D.R.; Welsh, G.H.; Li, F.Y.; Cipiccia, S.; Ersfeld, B.; Grant, D.W.; Grant, P.A.; Islam, M.R.; et al. Three electron beams from a laser-plasma wakefield accelerator and the energy apportioning question. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 43910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  141. Behm, K.; Hussein, A.; Zhao, T.Z.; Dann, S.; Hou, B.X.; Yanovsky, V.; Nees, J.; Maksimchuk, A.; Schumaker, W.; Thomas, A.G.R.; et al. Measurements of electron beam ring structures from laser wakefield accelerators. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 2019, 61, 065012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Salehi, F.; Le, M.; Railing, L.; Kolesik, M.; Milchberg, H.M. Laser-Accelerated, Low-Divergence 15-MeV Quasimonoenergetic Electron Bunches at 1 kHz. Phys. Rev. X 2021, 11, 021055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Aniculaesei, C.; Pathak, V.B.; Oh, K.H.; Singh, P.K.; Lee, B.R.; Hojbota, C.I.; Pak, T.G.; Brunetti, E.; Yoo, B.J.; Sung, J.H.; et al. Proof-of-Principle Experiment for Nanoparticle-Assisted Laser Wakefield Electron Acceleration. Phys. Rev. Appl. 2019, 12, 044041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Xu, J.; Bae, L.; Ezzat, M.; Kim, H.T.; Yang, J.M.; Lee, S.H.; Yoon, J.W.; Sung, J.H.; Lee, S.K.; Ji, L.; et al. Nanoparticle-insertion scheme to decouple electron injection from laser evolution in laser wakefield acceleration. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 11128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Lazzarini, C.M.; Grittani, G.M.; Valenta, P.; Zymak, I.; Antipenkov, R.; Chaulagain, U.; Goncalves, L.V.N.; Grenfell, A.; Lamač, M.; Lorenz, S.; et al. Ultrarelativistic electron beams accelerated by terawatt scalable kHz laser. Phys. Plasmas 2024, 31, 030703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Eliasson, B.; Liu, C.S. An electromagnetic gamma-ray free electron laser. J. Plasma Phys. 2013, 79, 995–998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Ledingham, K.W.D.; Spencer, I.; McCanny, T.; Singhal, R.P.; Santala, M.I.K.; Clark, E.; Watts, I.; Beg, F.N.; Zepf, M.; Krushelnick, K.; et al. Photonuclear Physics when a Multiterawatt Laser Pulse Interacts with Solid Targets. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2000, 84, 899–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Nedorezov, V.G.; Turinge, A.A.; Shatunov, Y.M. Photonuclear experiments with Compton-backscattered gamma beams. Physics-Uspekhi 2004, 47, 341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Kolenatý, D.; Hadjisolomou, P.; Versaci, R.; Jeong, T.M.; Valenta, P.; Olšovcová, V.; Bulanov, S.V. Electron-positron pairs and radioactive nuclei production by irradiation of high-Z target with γ-photon flash generated by an ultra-intense laser in the λ3 regime. Phys. Rev. Res. 2022, 4, 023124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Pomerantz, I.; McCary, E.; Meadows, A.R.; Arefiev, A.; Bernstein, A.C.; Chester, C.; Cortez, J.; Donovan, M.E.; Dyer, G.; Gaul, E.W.; et al. Ultrashort Pulsed Neutron Source. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2014, 113, 184801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  151. Cowan, T.E.; Hunt, A.W.; Phillips, T.W.; Wilks, S.C.; Perry, M.D.; Brown, C.; Fountain, W.; Hatchett, S.; Johnson, J.; Key, M.H.; et al. Photonuclear Fission from High Energy Electrons from Ultraintense Laser-Solid Interactions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2000, 84, 903–906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  152. Schwoerer, H.; Ewald, F.; Sauerbrey, R.; Galy, J.; Magill, J.; Rondinella, V.; Schenkel, R.; Butz, T. Fission of actinides using a tabletop laser. Europhys. Lett. 2003, 61, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Weeks, K.J.; Litvinenko, V.N.; Madey, J.M.J. The Compton backscattering process and radiotherapy. Med. Phys. 1997, 24, 417–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Antonelli, L.; Atzeni, S.; Schiavi, A.; Baton, S.D.; Brambrink, E.; Koenig, M.; Rousseaux, C.; Richetta, M.; Batani, D.; Forestier-Colleoni, P.; et al. Laser-driven shock waves studied by x-ray radiography. Phys. Rev. E 2017, 95, 063205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Ujeniuc, S.; Suvaila, R. Towards quantum technologies with gamma photons. EPJ Quantum Technol. 2024, 11, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Bulanov, S.V.; Esirkepov, T.Z.; Kando, M.; Koga, J.; Kondo, K.; Korn, G. On the problems of relativistic laboratory astrophysics and fundamental physics with super powerful lasers. Plasma Phys. Rep. 2015, 41, 1–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Rees, M.J.; Mészáros, P. Relativistic fireballs: Energy conversion and time-scales. Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 1992, 258, 41P–43P. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Philippov, A.A.; Spitkovsky, A. Ab-initio Pulsar Magnetosphere: Particle Acceleration in Oblique Rotators and High-energy Emission Modeling. Astrophys. J. 2018, 855, 94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Aharonian, F.; An, Q.; Axikegu; Bai, L.X.; Bai, Y.X.; Bao, Y.W.; Bastieri, D.; Bi, X.J.; Bi, Y.J.; Cai, H.; et al. Extended Very-High-Energy Gamma-Ray Emission Surrounding PSR J0622 + 3749 Observed by LHAASO-KM2A. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2021, 126, 241103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  160. Esirkepov, T.Z.; Bulanov, S.V. Fundamental physics and relativistic laboratory astrophysics with extreme power lasers. Eur. Astron. Soc. Publ. Ser. 2012, 58, 7–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Ehlotzky, F.; Krajewska, K.; Kamiński, J.Z. Fundamental processes of quantum electrodynamics in laser fields of relativistic power. Rep. Prog. Phys. 2009, 72, 046401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Maslarova, D.; Martinez, B.; Vranic, M. Radiation-dominated injection of positrons generated by the nonlinear Breit–Wheeler process into a plasma channel. Phys. Plasmas 2023, 30, 093107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Martinez, B.; Barbosa, B.; Vranic, M. Creation and direct laser acceleration of positrons in a single stage. Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams 2023, 26, 011301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Kim, H.; Noh, Y.; Song, J.; Lee, S.; Won, J.; Song, C.; Bae, L.; Ryu, C.M.; Nam, C.H.; Bang, W. Electron-positron generation by irradiating various metallic materials with laser-accelerated electrons. Results Phys. 2024, 57, 107310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Matys, M.; Hadjisolomou, P.; Shaisultanov, R.; Valenta, P.; Lamac, M.; Jeong, T.M.; Thistlewood, J.P.; Ridgers, C.P.; Pirozhkov, A.S.; Bulanov, S.V. Collimated γ-flash emission along the target surface irradiated by a laser at non-grazing incidence. New J. Phys. 2025, 27, 033018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Blackburn, T.G. Radiation reaction in electron-beam interactions with high-intensity lasers. Rev. Mod. Plasma Phys. 2020, 4, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Jirka, M.; Bulanov, S.V. Effects of Colliding Laser Pulses Polarization on e-e+ Cascade Development in Extreme Focusing. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2024, 133, 125001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Ju, G.; Xu, D.; Highland, M.J.; Thompson, C.; Zhou, H.; Eastman, J.A.; Fuoss, P.H.; Zapol, P.; Kim, H.; Stephenson, G.B. Coherent X-ray Spectroscopy Reveals the Persistence of Island Arrangements during Layer-by-Layer Growth. Nat. Phys. 2019, 15, 589–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Bencivenga, F.; Cucini, R.; Capotondi, F.; Battistoni, A.; Mincigrucci, R.; Giangrisostomi, E.; Gessini, A.; Manfredda, M.; Nikolov, I.; Pedersoli, E.; et al. Four-Wave Mixing Experiments with Extreme Ultraviolet Transient Gratings. Nature 2015, 520, 205–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  170. Fidler, A.P.; Camp, S.J.; Warrick, E.R.; Bloch, E.; Marroux, H.J.; Neumark, D.M.; Schafer, K.J.; Gaarde, M.B.; Leone, S.R. Nonlinear XUV Signal Generation Probed by Transient Grating Spectroscopy with Attosecond Pulses. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 1384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  171. Chapman, H.N.; Fromme, P.; Barty, A.; White, T.A.; Kirian, R.A.; Aquila, A.; Hunter, M.S.; Schulz, J.; DePonte, D.P.; Weierstall, U.; et al. Femtosecond X-ray Protein Nanocrystallography. Nature 2011, 470, 73–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  172. Queré, F.; Vincenti, H. Reflecting Petawatt Lasers off Relativistic Plasma Mirrors: A Realistic Path to the Schwinger Limit. High Power Laser Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, e62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Edwards, M.R.; Mikhailova, J.M.; Fisch, N.J. The X-ray Emission Effectiveness of Plasma Mirrors: Reexamining Power-Law Scaling for Relativistic High-Order Harmonic Generation. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 5154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Bulanov, S.V.; Naumova, N.M.; Pegoraro, F. Interaction of an ultrashort, relativistically strong laser pulse with an overdense plasma. Phys. Plasmas 1994, 1, 745–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Einstein, A. Zur Elektrodynamik Bewegter Körper. Ann. Phys. 1905, 17, 891–921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Lamač, M.; Mima, K.; Nejdl, J.; Chaulagain, U.; Bulanov, S.V. Coherent Attosecond X-ray Pulses from Beam-Driven Relativistic Plasma Mirrors. arXiv 2024, arXiv:2403.03277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Valenta, P.; Esirkepov, T.Z.; Koga, J.K.; Pirozhkov, A.S.; Kando, M.; Kawachi, T.; Liu, Y.K.; Fang, P.; Chen, P.; Mu, J.; et al. Recoil effects on reflection from relativistic mirrors in laser plasmas. Phys. Plasmas 2020, 27, 032109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Mima, K.; Matys, M.; Sentoku, Y.; Nagatomo, H.; Iwata, N.; Jeong, T.; Bulanov, S. Generations of spiral laser beam, spiral electron beam and longitudinal magnetic fields in hole-boring. Fundam. Plasma Phys. 2024, 11, 100057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Inchingolo, G.; Grismayer, T.; Loureiro, N.F.; Fonseca, R.A.; Silva, L.O. Fully Kinetic Large-scale Simulations of the Collisionless Magnetorotational Instability. Astrophys. J. 2018, 859, 149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. The ELI User Portal. Available online: https://up.eli-laser.eu/ (accessed on 27 April 2025).
Figure 1. The current main page of the VBL site (online at [44]) with the available visualizations.
Figure 1. The current main page of the VBL site (online at [44]) with the available visualizations.
Photonics 12 00436 g001
Figure 2. Example of a visualization outside of VR mode (from Section 3.1.1) displaying multiple viewpoints and graphical elements like graphs and legends.
Figure 2. Example of a visualization outside of VR mode (from Section 3.1.1) displaying multiple viewpoints and graphical elements like graphs and legends.
Photonics 12 00436 g002
Figure 3. Some of the authors of this paper utilizing VR stations at the ELI Beamlines facility.
Figure 3. Some of the authors of this paper utilizing VR stations at the ELI Beamlines facility.
Photonics 12 00436 g003
Figure 4. Visualizations of laser interaction with (a) cryogenic hydrogen target and (b) plastic target for ion acceleration. The coloring is described in the text. The vertical height of the 2D layers represents the field amplitude, plasma density, and particle energy, respectively.
Figure 4. Visualizations of laser interaction with (a) cryogenic hydrogen target and (b) plastic target for ion acceleration. The coloring is described in the text. The vertical height of the 2D layers represents the field amplitude, plasma density, and particle energy, respectively.
Photonics 12 00436 g004
Figure 5. Visualizations of laser interaction with (a) double-layer deuterium-hydrogen target with corrugated interface (b) plasma shutter and silver target for ion acceleration. The coloring is described in the text. The vertical height of the 2D layers in (a) represents the field amplitude and ion densities, respectively.
Figure 5. Visualizations of laser interaction with (a) double-layer deuterium-hydrogen target with corrugated interface (b) plasma shutter and silver target for ion acceleration. The coloring is described in the text. The vertical height of the 2D layers in (a) represents the field amplitude and ion densities, respectively.
Photonics 12 00436 g005
Figure 6. Visualizations of (a) electromagnetic electron rings, (b) nanoparticle-assisted laser wakefield acceleration. The coloring is described in the text.
Figure 6. Visualizations of (a) electromagnetic electron rings, (b) nanoparticle-assisted laser wakefield acceleration. The coloring is described in the text.
Photonics 12 00436 g006
Figure 7. Visualizations of (a) collimated γ -flash emission along the target surface, (b) electron–positron pair cascade in a laser-electron collision, (c) attosecond γ -ray flashes and electron–positron pairs in dyadic laser interaction with microwire. The coloring is described in the text.
Figure 7. Visualizations of (a) collimated γ -flash emission along the target surface, (b) electron–positron pair cascade in a laser-electron collision, (c) attosecond γ -ray flashes and electron–positron pairs in dyadic laser interaction with microwire. The coloring is described in the text.
Photonics 12 00436 g007
Figure 8. Visualizations of (a) coherent attosecond pulse generation and (b) generations of spiral laser and electron beams. The coloring is described in the text. The vertical height of the 2D layers in (a) represents the amplitude of positive and negative part of the field and ion density, respectively.
Figure 8. Visualizations of (a) coherent attosecond pulse generation and (b) generations of spiral laser and electron beams. The coloring is described in the text. The vertical height of the 2D layers in (a) represents the amplitude of positive and negative part of the field and ion density, respectively.
Photonics 12 00436 g008
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Matys, M.; Thistlewood, J.P.; Kecová, M.; Valenta, P.; Greplová Žáková, M.; Jirka, M.; Hadjisolomou, P.; Špádová, A.; Lamač, M.; Bulanov, S.V. Visualization of High-Intensity Laser–Matter Interactions in Virtual Reality and Web Browser. Photonics 2025, 12, 436. https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics12050436

AMA Style

Matys M, Thistlewood JP, Kecová M, Valenta P, Greplová Žáková M, Jirka M, Hadjisolomou P, Špádová A, Lamač M, Bulanov SV. Visualization of High-Intensity Laser–Matter Interactions in Virtual Reality and Web Browser. Photonics. 2025; 12(5):436. https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics12050436

Chicago/Turabian Style

Matys, Martin, James P. Thistlewood, Mariana Kecová, Petr Valenta, Martina Greplová Žáková, Martin Jirka, Prokopis Hadjisolomou, Alžběta Špádová, Marcel Lamač, and Sergei V. Bulanov. 2025. "Visualization of High-Intensity Laser–Matter Interactions in Virtual Reality and Web Browser" Photonics 12, no. 5: 436. https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics12050436

APA Style

Matys, M., Thistlewood, J. P., Kecová, M., Valenta, P., Greplová Žáková, M., Jirka, M., Hadjisolomou, P., Špádová, A., Lamač, M., & Bulanov, S. V. (2025). Visualization of High-Intensity Laser–Matter Interactions in Virtual Reality and Web Browser. Photonics, 12(5), 436. https://doi.org/10.3390/photonics12050436

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop