MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033963949 · doi:10.1142/s0219633611006372

STUDY OF THE S<sub>1</sub> AND S<sub>2</sub> EXCITED STATES OF GAS-PHASE PROTONATED SCHIFF BASE RETINAL CHROMOPHORES IN ONE AND TWO PHOTON ABSORPTION

2011· article· en· W2033963949 on OpenAlexaff
Yuanzuo Li, Peng Song, Ying Shi, Yong Ding, Fengjie Zhou, Meiyu Zhao, Maodu Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Theoretical and Computational Chemistry · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsExcited stateChromophoreProtonationChemistryPhotochemistrySchiff baseRetinalAtomic physicsCrystallographyPhysicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The S 1 and S 2 excited states of gas-phase protonated Schiff base retinal chromophores in the one- and two-photon absorptions (TPAs) are investigated with time-dependent density functional theory. In one-photon absorption, the two-dimensional (2D) site and three-dimensional (3D) cube representations reveal that S 1 and S 2 excited states of gas-phase protonated Schiff base retinal chromophores are all charge transfer excited states. To better study the weak S 2 excited states of gas-phase protonated Schiff base retinal chromophores, we investigated theoretically excited state properties of them in TPA. For 11-cis dimethyl retinal, it is found that the cross section of S 2 excited state is 51.04 GM in PTA, which is only slightly smaller than that of S 1 (77.04 GM) in TPA. Therefore, the S 2 excited state of 11-cis dimethyl retinal can be clearly observed in TPA experiment. The 2D site and 3D cube representations reveal that electronic transition from S 1 to S 2 excited state of gas-phase protonated Schiff base retinal chromophores in TPA are also of charge transfer character.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Theoretical and Computational ChemistrySame topicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics researchFrench-language works237,207