MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094882359 · doi:10.1063/1.1925610

Absolute electronic excitation cross sections for low-energy electron (5–12eV) scattering from condensed thymine

2005· article· en· W2094882359 on OpenAlexafffund
Pierre L. Lévesque, M. Michaud, W. Cho, Léon Sanche

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsExcitationElectronElectron scatteringAtomic physicsScatteringPhysicsThymineNuclear physicsChemistryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The absolute cross sections for electronic excitations of thymine by electron impact between 5 and 12 eV are determined by means of electron-energy loss (EEL) spectroscopy for the molecule deposited at submonolayer coverage on an inert Ar substrate. The lowest EEL features at 3.7 and 4.0 eV are attributed to the excitation of the triplet 1 3A'(pi --> pi*) and 1 3A''(n --> pi*) valence states of the molecule. The higher EEL features located at 4.9, 6.3, 7.3, and 9 eV with a weak shoulder around 6 eV are ascribed mostly to triplet valence (pi --> pi*) excitation manifold of the molecule. The energy dependence of the cross section for both the lowest triplet valence excitations shows essentially a peak at about 5 eV reaching a value of 2.9 x 10(-17) cm2. The cross sections for the higher EEL features are generally characterized by a common broad maximum around 8 eV. The latter reaches a value of 1.36 x 10(-16) cm2 for the combined 6 and 6.3 eV excitation region. The maxima in the present cross sections are found to correspond to the resonances that have been reported at about the same energies in the O- yield from electron impact on thymine in the gas phase.

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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations33
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207