MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074321557 · doi:10.1139/v04-079

Intrachannel vibronic coupling in molecular photoionization

2004· article· en· W2074321557 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
G. J. Rathbone, E. D. Poliakoff, John D. Bozek, Robert R. Lucchese

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice of ScienceTexas A and M University
KeywordsPhotoionizationVibronic couplingChemistryAtomic physicsIonizationVibronic spectroscopyTriatomic moleculeExcited stateExcitationMoleculeAntisymmetric relationMolecular physicsSpectral linevan der Waals forcePhotoemission spectroscopyX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyPhysicsIonNuclear magnetic resonanceQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We discuss the excitation of forbidden vibrational transitions accompanying photoionization of linear triatomic molecules. Excitation of a single quantum of the antisymmetric stretching vibration is observed for mole cules with inversion symmetry, as is the bending mode. Photoelectron spectra of the N 2 O + (A 2 Π), CO 2 + (C 2 Σ g + ), and CS 2 + (B 2 Σ u + ) states obtained over a range of ionization energies exhibit contrasting behavior for the relative intensities of the forbidden vibrations. These energy-dependent vibrational branching ratios are shown to result from an intrachannel vibronic coupling mechanism. Moreover, this intrachannel coupling can be further divided into two cases, one in which the photoionization cross section is sensitive to geometry changes, and a second case in which it is not. These different cases can be distinguished by comparing the experimental and theoretical results for all three molecules.Key words: photoelectron spectroscopy, vibronic coupling, photoionization.PACS Nos.: 33.60.Cv, 33.20.Ni, 33.20.Wr, 33.80.Eh

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 score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations17
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207