New developments in first-principles excited-state dynamics simulations: unveiling the solvent specificity of excited anionic cluster relaxation and electron solvation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Charge-transfer-to-solvent excited iodide–polar solvent molecule clusters, [I− (Solv)n]*, have attracted substantial interest over the past 20 years as they can undergo intriguing relaxation processes leading ultimately to the formation of gas-phase molecular analogues of the solvated electron. In this review article, we present a comprehensive overview of the development and application of state-of-the-art first-principles molecular dynamics simulation approaches to understand and interpret the results of femtosecond photoelectron spectroscopy experiments on [I− (Solv)n]* relaxation, which point to a high degree of solvent specificity in the electron solvation dynamics. The intricate molecular details of the [I− (Solv)n]* relaxation process are presented, and by contrasting the relaxation mechanisms of clusters with several different solvents (water, methanol and acetonitrile), the molecular basis of the solvent specificity of electron solvation in [I− (Solv)n]* is uncovered, leading to a more refined view of the manifestation of electron solvation in small gas-phase clusters.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".