MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015584227 · doi:10.1063/1.1989327

Photodissociation of HI and DI: Testing models for electronic structure via polarization of atomic photofragments

2005· article· en· W2015584227 on OpenAlexafffund
David N. Jodoin, Alex Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsExcited statePhotodissociationAtomic physicsChemistryExcitationDipolePotential energyAb initioGround stateWave packetAb initio quantum chemistry methodsMolecular electronic transitionAngular momentumTransition dipole momentPhysicsMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The photodissociation dynamics of HI and DI are examined using time-dependent wave-packet techniques. The orientation and alignment parameters aQ(K) (p) are determined as a function of photolysis energy for the resulting ground-state I(2P(3/2)) and excited-state I(2P(1/2)) atoms. The aQ(K) (p) parameters describe the coherent and incoherent contributions to the angular momentum distributions from the A 1pi(1), a 3pi(1), and t 3sigma(1) electronic states accessed by perpendicular excitation and the a 3pi(0+) state accessed by a parallel transition. The outcomes of the dynamics based on both shifted ab initio results and three empirical models for the potential-energy curves and transition dipole moments are compared and contrasted. It is demonstrated that experimental measurement of the aQ(K) (p) parameters for the excitation from the vibrational ground state (upsilon=0) would be able to distinguish between the available models for the HI potential-energy curves and transition dipole moments. The differences between the aQ(K) (p) parameters for the excitation from upsilon=0 stand in sharp contrast to the scalar properties, i.e., total cross section and I* branching fraction, which require experimental measurement of photodissociation from excited vibrational states (upsilon>0) to distinguish between the models.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 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

Citations16
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207