MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022912920 · doi:10.1080/10420150108214127

Molecular dynamics study of exciton relaxation in ionic halides

2001· article· en· W2022912920 on OpenAlexaff
Chun-rong Fu, K. S. Song

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiation effects and defects in solids · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicInorganic Chemistry and Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcitonRelaxation (psychology)Oscillation (cell signaling)ChemistryFemtosecondIonic bondingElectronMolecular physicsAtomic physicsMolecular dynamicsHalidePhysicsCondensed matter physicsComputational chemistryIonOpticsQuantum mechanicsInorganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report here the preliminary results of molecular dynamics simulation of exciton and hole relaxation in KBr and NaBr. The previously used semi-classical program has been modified to implement the solution of Newton's equations with a time step of 0.50 femtosecond. We started from the initial state of an established Vk-center with a bound electron, as well as from an unrelaxed one-center exciton. The main points are: (1) Within about 1.5—2.0ps the exciton reaches the maximum relaxed configuration. (2) An oscillatory motion ensues at this point with a period of about 1 ps. The oscillation is around the third nn F-H pair geometry in KBr and around the nearest F-H separation in NaBr. (3) The relaxation of the Vk-center is much slower in KBr than in NaBr. In both there is a rapid bond length oscillation. (4) When an electron is localized nearby, this hole bond oscillation is not seen. These results will be compared with available experimental observations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.234
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 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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiation effects and defects in solidsSame topicInorganic Chemistry and MaterialsFrench-language works237,207