MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047800812 · doi:10.1021/jp302627w

Superradiance Transition in Photosynthetic Light-Harvesting Complexes

2012· article· en· W2047800812 on OpenAlexaff
G. L. Celardo, F. Borgonovi, Marco Merkli, V. I. Tsifrinovich, G. P. Berman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuperradiancePhotosynthetic reaction centreHamiltonian (control theory)PhysicsExcitationQuantumCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)DipoleEigenvalues and eigenvectorsQuantum mechanicsAtomic physicsQuantum electrodynamicsChemistryElectron transferPhotochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the role of long-lasting quantum coherence in the efficiency of energy transport at room temperature in Fenna-Matthews-Olson photosynthetic complexes. The excitation energy transfer due to coupling of the light-harvesting complex to the reaction center (“sink”) is analyzed using an effective non-Hermitian Hamiltonian. We show that, as the coupling to the reaction center is varied, maximal efficiency in energy transport is achieved in the vicinity of the superradiance transition, characterized by a segregation of the imaginary parts of the eigenvalues of the effective non-Hermitian Hamiltonian. Our results demonstrate that the presence of the sink (which provides a quasi-continuum in the energy spectrum) is the dominant effect in the energy transfer which takes place even in the absence of a thermal bath. This approach allows one to study the effects of finite temperature and the effects of any coupling scheme to the reaction center. Moreover, taking into account a realistic electric dipole interaction, we show that the optimal distance from the reaction center to the Fenna-Matthews-Olson system occurs at the superradiance transition, and we show that this is consistent with available experimental data.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations71
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry CSame topicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical StudiesFrench-language works237,207