Zero-point energy, tunnelling, and vibrational adiabaticity in the Mu + H<sub>2</sub>reaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Isotopic substitution of muonium for hydrogen provides an unparalleled opportunity to deepen our understanding of quantum mass effects on chemical reactions. A recent topical review in this journal of the thermal and vibrationally state-selected reaction of Mu with H2 raises a number of issues that are addressed here. We show that some earlier quantum mechanical calculations of the Mu + H2 reaction, which are highlighted in this review, and which have been used to benchmark approximate methods, are in error by as much as 19% in the low-temperature limit. We demonstrate that an approximate treatment of the Born–Oppenheimer diagonal correction that was used in some recent studies is not valid for treating the vibrationally state-selected reaction. We also discuss why vibrationally adiabatic potentials that neglect bend zero-point energy are not a useful analytical tool for understanding reaction rates, and why vibrationally non-adiabatic transitions cannot be understood by considering tunnelling through vibrationally adiabatic potentials. Finally, we present calculations on a hierarchical family of potential energy surfaces to assess the sensitivity of rate constants to the quality of the potential surface.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".