MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dynamics of molecular superrotors in an external magnetic field

2015· preprint· en· W2126737926 on OpenAlexafffund
Aleksey Korobenko, Valery Milner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics B Atomic Molecular and Optical Physics · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRotation (mathematics)ParamagnetismMagnetic fieldMolecular dynamicsAngular momentumDiatomic moleculePhysicsAtomic physicsField (mathematics)Larmor precessionPlane (geometry)Coupling (piping)ChemistryCondensed matter physicsMolecular physicsMoleculeClassical mechanicsMaterials scienceQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We excite diatomic oxygen and nitrogen to high rotational states with an optical centrifuge and study their dynamics in an external magnetic field. Ion imaging is employed to directly visualize, and follow in time, the rotation plane of the molecular superrotors. The two different mechanisms of interaction between the magnetic field and the molecular angular momentum in paramagnetic oxygen and non-magnetic nitrogen lead to qualitatively different behaviour. In nitrogen, we observe the precession of the molecular angular momentum around the field vector. In oxygen, strong spin–rotation coupling results in faster and richer dynamics, encompassing the splitting of the rotation plane into three separate components. As the centrifuged molecules evolve with no significant dispersion of the molecular wave function, the observed magnetic interaction presents an efficient mechanism for controlling the plane of molecular rotation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.277
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics B Atomic Molecular and Optical PhysicsSame topicLaser-Matter Interactions and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207