MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994456195 · doi:10.1134/s1054660x09150407

Strong field ionization of many electron systems: A quantum chemical challenge

2009· article· en· W1994456195 on OpenAlexaff
T. T. Nguyen‐Dang, M. B. Peters, S. -M. Wang, François Dion

Bibliographic record

VenueLaser Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIonizationElectronPhysicsFormalism (music)Atomic physicsAb initioField (mathematics)Double ionizationAmplitudeQuantumQuantum mechanicsIonMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A non-variational Time-Dependent Multiconfiguration Self-Consistent Field (TDMCSCF) scheme has been developed [Nguyen-Dang T.T., Peters M., Wang S.-M., Sinelnikov E., and Dion F., J. Chem. Phys. 127, 174107 (2007)] to describe, by an ab-initio approach, the time-resolved electron dynamics of a laser-driven many-electron atomic or molecular system. As an L 2 method, this approach faces severe challenges when ionization and large-amplitude electronic motions are addressed. We present here an extension of this TDMCSCF scheme to include multiple ionization processes, using a Feschbach state-partitioning formalism, allowing the bound electrons’ dynamics to be treated by the L 2-TDMCSCF method, while the ionized electrons can be treated separately by an alternative approach. We present results of proof-of-principle calculations pertaining to the single and double ionizations of H 2 and discuss methodological issues such as the systematic corrections that could be brought, using this approach, to the strong field approximation (SFA).

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLaser PhysicsSame topicLaser-Matter Interactions and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207