References

The canon

• Molisch, A. F. & Oehry, B. P. Radiation Trapping in Atomic Vapours. Oxford University Press, 1998 (reprinted 2006). ISBN 978-0-19-853866-0. 443 pp. The book we are explicating. OCR'd full text.
• Scott, H. A. "Cretin — a radiative transfer capability for laboratory plasmas." J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transfer 71, 689–701 (2001). DOI 10.1016/S0022-4073(01)00109-1. The CRETIN reference paper. Ref [7] cites M&O — direct lineage.
• Holstein, T. "Imprisonment of resonance radiation in gases." Phys. Rev. 72, 1212 (1947). The integral equation.
• Biberman, L. M. Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 17, 416 (1947). Independent derivation.

Russian analytical extension (Molisch's own follow-ups)

• Bezuglov, N. N., Klyucharev, A. N., Kazansky, A. K., Molisch, A. F., Fuso, F., Allegrini, M. "Solution of the Holstein equation of radiation trapping in one-dimensional geometries by the geometric quantization technique." Phys. Rev. A 57, 2612 (1998). DOI 10.1103/PhysRevA.57.2612.
• Kazansky, A. K., Bezuglov, N. N., Molisch, A. F., Fuso, F., Allegrini, M. "Saturated regime of the Holstein–Biberman equation." Phys. Rev. A 64, 022719 (2001).
• Bezuglov, N. N., Molisch, A. F., Fuso, F., Allegrini, M., Ekers, A. "Nonlinear radiation imprisonment in magneto-optical vapor traps." Phys. Rev. A 77, 063414 (2008). DOI 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.063414. Predicts subnatural decay in cold MOTs.

CRETIN corpus (LightCell-relevant, 6 PDFs)

• Scott 2001 (canonical, above).
• Langer, S. H., Scott, H. A., Marinak, M. M., Landen, O. L. "Comparisons of Line Emission from ICF Capsules in 2- and 3-Dimensional Simulations." UCRL-JC-148664 (2002).
• Sequoia, K. L., Tillack, M. S., Scott, H. A. "A comparison of Hyades and Cretin for modeling laser absorption in underdense plasmas." UCSD-CER-06-09 (2006). The honest paper where Hyades and Cretin disagree on inverse-bremsstrahlung absorption at low T_e.
• Scott, "Non-LTE Plasma Modeling with Cretin." EUV/Soft X-Ray Workshop (2011).
• Scott, ICTP lecture slides (2017). Cretin install: source /home/.../addcr.
• Fusion-plasma Ch II: Atomic Physics Relevant to Fusion Plasmas. Tokamak edge/divertor CRM context.

Applications & experimental anchors

• Docters, B., Wrachtrup, J., Gerhardt, I. "Two Step Excitation in Hot Atomic Sodium Vapor." Scientific Reports 7, 12189 (2017). DOI 10.1038/s41598-017-12089-w. Direct Na 589 + 819 nm experiment; factor-3 detuning enhancement vs ladder-EIT.
• Anderson, J. M. et al. "Improvement of mercury low-pressure discharge lamps through use of rare Hg isotopes." (GTE Lighting Research, 1985); see also Grossman et al. JAP 60, 1257 (1986). The Hg-196 doping result.
• Sesko, D. W., Walker, T., Wieman, C. E. "Behavior of neutral atoms in a spontaneous force trap." JOSA B 8, 946 (1991). The MOT density-limit paper that Layer 5 will reinterpret.

Deep-research compilations (this project, May 2026)

• Claude deep-research: post-1998 field survey, 257 lines. Strongest on Bezuglov + DPAL + ML opacity surrogates. Has a recall gap on LightCell. cached
• ChatGPT deep-research: LightCell 589/819 engineering ledger, 338 lines. The η_819 sensitivity analysis. Quench coefficient pin-down to M&O §3.3 ranges. Note: first-collision-branching framing requires correction; see Layer 8 prose.
• Gemini deep-research: field survey + LightCell case study, 128 lines. Names the company, the patent, the 1400°C / 2.1 eV / 40%+ targets.

How to read the references

This is a 50-year field. Most papers are wrong in regimes outside their published assumptions. Read the assumption section first, then the equations. M&O §4.2.3 (the nine assumptions) is the template: every paper since 1947 reduces to "we relaxed Holstein's assumption (i, ii, …)."

If you find a paper that you can't reconcile with the others, the path is: trace it back to which of M&O's nine assumptions it relaxes (or violates). The contradictions usually disappear at that level.