MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096454831 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.91.245429

Effect of broadening in the weak-coupling limit of vibrationally coupled electron transport through molecular junctions and the analogy to quantum dot circuit QED systems

2015· article· en· W2096454831 on OpenAlexfundno aff
R. Härtle, Manas Kulkarni

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum and electron transport phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoCity University of New YorkAlexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
KeywordsPhysicsCoupling (piping)ElectronExcitationNon-equilibrium thermodynamicsPhotonAtomic physicsDegrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)PopulationMolecular vibrationQuantum dotMicrowaveElectron transport chainCondensed matter physicsQuantum mechanicsChemistryMoleculeMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the nonequilibrium population of a vibrational mode in the steady state of a biased molecular junction, using a rate equation approach. We focus on the limit of weak electronic-vibrational coupling and show that, in the resonant transport regime and for sufficiently high bias voltages, the level of vibrational excitation increases with decreasing coupling strength, assuming a finite and nonzero value. An analytic behavior with respect to the electronic-vibrational coupling strength is only observed if the influence of environmental degrees of freedom is explicitly taken into account. We consider the influence of three different types of broadening: hybridization with the electrodes, thermal fluctuations, and the coupling to a thermal heat bath. Our results apply to vibrationally coupled electron transport through molecular junctions but also to quantum dots coupled to a microwave cavity, where the photon number can be expected to exhibit a similar behavior.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.515
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations26
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review BSame topicQuantum and electron transport phenomenaFrench-language works237,207