Spectroscopic investigation of sensitized-Cs (6<sup>2</sup> <i>P</i><sub>3/2</sub>6<sup>2</sup><i>P</i><sub>1/2</sub>) laser retrofluorescence in a pure optically thick vapour near a dissipative surface
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A low-power, monochromatic, tunable diode laser is used to selectively populate the cesium 62P3/2 (Fe = 2, 3, 4, 5) hyperfine-structure levels in a pure optically thick vapour in the presence of a dissipative surface. The integrated retrofluorescence intensities for the 852 nm (62P3/2 → 62S1/2), 894 nm (62P1/2 → 62S1/2)> and 455 nm (72P3/2 → 62S1/2) lines have been measured and analyzed. When the laser frequency is scanned through the [62S1/2(Fg) → 62P3/2(Fe)] hyperfine resonance line, the sensitized retrofluorescence spectral signal corresponding to the 894 nm line has a profile significantly different from the retrofluorescence signal at the 852 nm line, but rather similar to the profiles of the lines associated with the energy-pooling collisions. The population of the 62P1/2 atomic level in an optically thick vapour cannot be explained only by the fine-structure excitation transfer process [Cs (62P3/2) + Cs (62S1/2) ↔ Cs (62P1/2) + Cs (62S1/2)] usually accepted in an optically thin vapour. We have investigated inelastic collisions in the populating mechanisms of 62P1/2 level starting from the 62P3/2 level exited by the monochromatic laser taking into account the presence of an electrically conductive surface. It appears from our experimental and theoretical investigations that, the spectral properties of the laser-induced Cs 894 nm sensitized retrofluorescence in a pure optically thick vapour near a dissipative surface cannot be explained by both the conventional mechanism and cascade collisions. The satisfactory interpretation of the experimental results is an open problem of atomic spectroscopy.PACS Nos.: 32.30, 32.50, 32.70, 32.80, 34.10, 34.50, 42.62
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".