MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985265805 · doi:10.1063/1.4824382

On the effects of permanent molecular dipoles in the simultaneous absorption of two photons: Full generalized rotating wave approximation versus analytical results

2013· article· en· W1985265805 on OpenAlexafffund
William J. Meath, B. N. Jagatap

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNonlinear Optical Materials Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsExcitationDipolePhotonPhysicsResonance (particle physics)Atomic physicsDiscrete dipole approximationLaserWave functionRotating wave approximationAbsorption (acoustics)Computational physicsQuantum mechanicsOpticsQuantum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of permanent dipoles, and the relative effects of the direct permanent dipole and the virtual state excitation mechanisms, are discussed for excitations involving the simultaneous absorption of two identical photons. Two molecular models for two-photon excitation, one dominated by the direct permanent dipole mechanism and the other having significant contributions from both excitation mechanisms, are used for this purpose. Resonance profiles, as a function of laser intensity, are evaluated for both models by employing the full Generalized Rotating Wave Approximation method and the recently developed Analytic Generalized Rotating Wave Approximation (AGRWA). The profiles are used to assess (1) the nature of the effects of permanent molecular dipoles, (2) the relative contributions of the two excitation mechanisms, and (3) the validity of the AGRWA for two-photon excitations. The AGRWA is a very useful interpretive∕predictive tool even for higher laser intensities where its validity becomes questionable. It can be used to suggest how to exploit the effects of molecular permanent dipoles to enhance two photon excitations using both excitation mechanisms.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicNonlinear Optical Materials StudiesFrench-language works237,207