MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974131296 · doi:10.1364/josab.19.002852

Laser energy-pooling processes in an optically thick Cs vapor near a dissipative surface

2002· article· en· W1974131296 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean-Marie Gagné, Karine Le Bris, Marie-Claude Gagné

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Optical Society of America B · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsExcited stateLaserResonance (particle physics)Dissipative systemRadiative transferAtomic physicsSpectral lineMaterials scienceChemistryOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We characterize, for the first time to our knowledge, the laser-induced backward fluorescence (retrofluorescence) spectra that result from energy-pooling collisions between Cs atoms near a dissipative thin Cs layer on a glass substrate. We resolve, experimentally and theoretically, the laser spectroscopic problem of energy-pooling processes related to the nature of the glass–metallic vapor interface. Our study focused on the integrated laser-induced retrofluorescence spectra for the 455.5-nm (72P3/2–62S1/2) and 852.2-nm (62P3/2–62S1/2) lines as a function of laser scanning through pumping resonance at the 852.2-nm line. We experimentally investigate the retrofluorescence from 420 to 930 nm, induced by a diode laser tuned either in the wings or in the center of the pumping resonance line. We present a detailed theoretical model of the retrofluorescence signal based on the radiative transfer equation, taking into account the evanescent wave of the excited atomic dipole strongly coupled with a dissipative surface. Based on theoretical and experimental results, we evaluate the effective nonradiative transfer rate A¯62P3/2→62S1/2sf for atoms in the excited 62P3/2 level located in the near-field region of the surface of the cell. Values extracted from the energy-pooling process analysis are equivalent to those found directly from the 852.2-nm resonance retrofluorescence line. We show that the effective energy-pooling coefficients k˜72P3/2 and k˜72P1/2 are approximately equal. The agreement between theory and experiment is remarkably good, considering the simplicity of the model.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Optical Society of America BSame topicAtomic and Subatomic Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207