MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025811246 · doi:10.1103/physreva.73.032708

Electron correlation of one-dimensional<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math>in intense laser fields: Time-dependent extended Hartree-Fock and time-dependent density-functional-theory approaches

2006· article· lv· W2025811246 on OpenAlexaff
Nam A. Nguyen, André D. Bandrauk

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review A · 2006
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsExcited stateIonizationAtomic physicsGround stateAdiabatic processQuantum mechanicsIon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ionization and high-order harmonic generation of the one-dimensional (1D) ${\mathrm{H}}_{2}$ molecule in intense ultrashort laser fields are investigated using several current approximations for electron dynamics. Single- and double-ionization probabilities are compared with exact results. It is found that for the ground state $X\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}^{1}\ensuremath{\Sigma}_{g}^{+}$, time-dependent extended Hartree-Fock gives generally comparable results except in the plateau region. The adiabatic local density approximation and time-dependent optimized effective potential with self-interaction correction (TDKLI) methods underestimate the ionization probabilities with no plateau and knee for double ionization contrary to the exact results. For the triplet excited state $A\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}^{3}\ensuremath{\Sigma}_{u}^{+}$, where exchange is important, the TDKLI results agree well with the exact results. The exact double-ionization probabilities suggest the need for accurate pair-correlation functions.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations35
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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