MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054910402 · doi:10.1103/physreva.76.013405

Dynamic nuclear interference structures in the Coulomb explosion spectra of a hydrogen molecule in intense laser fields: Reexamination of molecular enhanced ionization

2007· article· en· W2054910402 on OpenAlexafffund
Szczepan Chelkowski, André D. Bandrauk, A. Staudte, P. B. Corkum

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review A · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaStudienstiftung des Deutschen VolkesDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsPhysicsIonizationCoulomb explosionAtomic physicsWave packetSpectral lineElectronLaserDissociation (chemistry)IonCoulombPhotonElectron ionizationQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several theoretical models are used to explain the origin of the recently observed (unexpected) spectral progression in the Coulomb explosion spectra of the hydrogen molecule photoionized by an intense ultrashort laser pulse. In the first ionization step the molecule loses its first electron and then the $\mathrm{H}_{2}{}^{+}$ molecular ion dissociates. Next, at the intermediate stage of the dissociation process, a localized electron state is created from which the second ionization occurs at each laser half-cycle. It is shown that interference between a net-two-photon and a one-photon transition introduces a dynamic structure into the nuclear wave packet corresponding to this localized electron state which leads to the regular spectral progressions seen in the experiment. We confirm these spectral progressions using numerical simulations based on a time-dependent Schr\"odinger equation describing the exact three-body dynamics of $\mathrm{H}_{2}{}^{+}$ in one dimension.

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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations67
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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