MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2188956949 · doi:10.1139/v2012-039

Nonperturbative time-dependent density functional theory (TDDFT) and time-dependent electron localization function (TDELF) study of the ionization of OCS and CS<sub>2</sub> with ultrashort intense laser pulses — Orientational effects

2012· article· en· W2188956949 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Emmanuel Fowe Penka, André D. Bandrauk

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTime-dependent density functional theoryChemistryIonizationAtomic physicsDensity functional theoryLaserAtomic orbitalElectronPhotoionizationMolecular physicsPhysicsIonComputational chemistryOpticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nonlinear nonperturbative response of OCS and CS 2 to ultrashort (few cycles) intense laser pulses was studied numerically by time-dependent density functional theory (TDDFT) methods to understand molecular ionization as a function of laser–molecule orientation. A time-dependent electron localization function(TDELF) was used to visualize the nonlinear nonperturbative electron transfer occurring during the laser pulse. It was found that, for intensities I &gt; 3.5 × 10 14 W/cm 2 , the inner shell Kohn–Sham (KS) molecular orbitals contribute significantly to the ionization, whereas for the intensity I &lt; 3.5 × 10 14 W/cm 2 , the highest occupied molecular orbital (HOMO) shows the dominant response to the field. In general, the ionization rate maxima correspond to the alignment of maximum KS orbital densities with the laser pulse polarization instead of orbital ionization potentials (IP). These findings are corroborated through analysis of the TDELF images, where the ionization occurs from the lone pair or bond regions of the corresponding molecules.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.462
Threshold uncertainty score0.380

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicLaser-Matter Interactions and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207