Molecular Properties Obtained by Analysis of Electronic Spectra Containing Interference Dips. Comparisons of Analytical Equations and Exact Models Based on Coupled Potential Energy Surfaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interference dips in electronic absorption spectra caused by coupling between excited states are calculated and interpreted using three methods: an analytical expression, an integratable expression, and wave packet propagation. All of the analyses give similar results. The dips (distantly related to Fano's antiresonance) are caused by spin−orbit coupling between the states involved in spin-forbidden transitions with narrow bandwidths and the state involved in a spin-allowed transition with a large bandwidth caused by progressions in normal vibrational modes that are displaced between the excited and ground electronic states. The analytical expression involves the assumptions that only one vibrational eigenstate of the “forbidden” electronic state is involved and that the broad background is represented by a Lorentzian-type function. The integratable expression replaces the Lorentzian function by one that represents the band shape caused by a progression of unresolved vibronic peaks. The wave packet propagation method is exact for the model. Analytical expressions for multiple interfering states and integratable expressions for multiple electronic states and multiple vibrational modes are derived. The spectra of Ni(H 2 O) 6 2+ and octahedral CrO 6 9- units in ZrO 2 ·33%Y 2 O 3 doped with chromium(III) are analyzed. Physical meanings and mathematical origins of the interference dips are interpreted.
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) | 0.001 | 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".