MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Probing Polar Molecules with High Harmonic Spectroscopy

2012· article· en· W1999085970 on OpenAlexaff
Eugene Frumker, N. Kajumba, J. B. Bertrand, H. J. Wörner, Christoph T. Hebeisen, Paul Hockett, M. Spanner, S. Patchkovskii, G. G. Paulus, D. M. Villeneuve, A. Naumov, P. B. Corkum

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsJoint Attosecond Science LaboratorySteacie Institute for Molecular SciencesUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigh harmonic generationAttosecondHarmonicsPhysicsPhase (matter)SpectroscopyIonizationHarmonicAtomic physicsAmplitudePolarChemical polarityPerpendicularMoleculeElectronMolecular physicsLaserOpticsUltrashort pulseIon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We bring the methodology of orienting polar molecules together with the phase sensitivity of high harmonic spectroscopy to experimentally compare the phase difference of attosecond bursts of radiation emitted upon electron recollision from different ends of a polar molecule. This phase difference has an impact on harmonics from aligned polar molecules, suppressing emission from the molecules parallel to the driving laser field while favoring the perpendicular ones. For oriented molecules, we measure the amplitude ratio of even to odd harmonics produced when intense light irradiates CO molecules and determine the degree of orientation and the phase difference of attosecond bursts using molecular frame ionization and recombination amplitudes. The sensitivity of the high harmonic spectrum to subtle phase differences in the emitted radiation makes it a detailed probe of polar molecules and will drive major advances in the theory of high harmonic generation.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.746

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations85
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicLaser-Matter Interactions and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207