MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2467607937 · doi:10.1063/1.4958306

On the optimization, and the intensity dependence, of the excitation rate for the absorption of two-photons due to the direct permanent dipole moment excitation mechanism

2016· article· en· W2467607937 on OpenAlexaff
William J. Meath

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP Advances · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNonlinear Optical Materials Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcitationAtomic physicsExcited stateDipolePhysicsLaserIntensity (physics)Perturbation theory (quantum mechanics)PhotonRate equationPerturbation (astronomy)OpticsQuantum mechanicsKinetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A model two-level dipolar molecule, and the rotating wave approximation and perturbation theory, are used to investigate the optimization and the laser intensity dependence of the two-photon excitation rate via the direct permanent dipole mechanism. The rate is proportional to the square of the laser intensity I only for small intensities and times when perturbation theory is applicable. An improvement on perturbation theory is provided by a small time RWA result for the rate which is not proportional to I2; rather it is proportional to the square of an effective intensity Ieff. For each laser intensity the optimum RWA excitation rate as a function of time, for low intensities, is proportional to I, not I2, and for high intensities it is proportional to Ieff. For a given two-photon transition the laser-molecule coupling optimizes for an intensity Imax which, for example, leads to a maximum possible excitation rate as a function of time. The validity of the RWA results of this paper, and the importance of including the effects of virtual excited states, are also discussed briefly.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP AdvancesSame topicNonlinear Optical Materials StudiesFrench-language works237,207