When do we need to account for the geometric phase in excited state dynamics?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate the role of the geometric phase (GP) in an internal conversion process when the system changes its electronic state by passing through a conical intersection (CI). Local analysis of a two-dimensional linear vibronic coupling (LVC) model Hamiltonian near the CI shows that the role of the GP is twofold. First, it compensates for a repulsion created by the so-called diagonal Born-Oppenheimer correction. Second, the GP enhances the non-adiabatic transition probability for a wave-packet part that experiences a central collision with the CI. To assess the significance of both GP contributions we propose two indicators that can be computed from parameters of electronic surfaces and initial conditions. To generalize our analysis to N-dimensional systems we introduce a reduction of a general N-dimensional LVC model to an effective 2D LVC model using a mode transformation that preserves short-time dynamics of the original N-dimensional model. Using examples of the bis(methylene) adamantyl and butatriene cations, and the pyrazine molecule we have demonstrated that their effective 2D models reproduce the short-time dynamics of the corresponding full dimensional models, and the introduced indicators are very reliable in assessing GP effects.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".