MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2733875206 · doi:10.1021/acs.accounts.7b00220

Geometric Phase Effects in Nonadiabatic Dynamics near Conical Intersections

2017· article· en· W2733875206 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounts of Chemical Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlfred P. Sloan Foundation
KeywordsConical intersectionVibronic couplingPotential energyWave functionElectronic structureConical surfaceDiatomic moleculeBorn–Oppenheimer approximationPhysicsExcited stateCoupling (piping)Statistical physicsFunction (biology)DiabaticTopology (electrical circuits)Energy (signal processing)Quantum mechanicsMoleculeGeometryMathematicsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dynamical consideration that goes beyond the common Born-Oppenheimer approximation (BOA) becomes necessary when energy differences between electronic potential energy surfaces become small or vanish. One of the typical scenarios of the BOA breakdown in molecules beyond diatomics is a conical intersection (CI) of electronic potential energy surfaces. CIs provide an efficient mechanism for radiationless electronic transitions: acting as "funnels" for the nuclear wave function, they enable rapid conversion of the excessive electronic energy into the nuclear motion. In addition, CIs introduce nontrivial geometric phases (GPs) for both electronic and nuclear wave functions. These phases manifest themselves in change of the wave function signs if one considers an evolution of the system around the CI. This sign change is independent of the shape of the encircling contour and thus has a topological character. How these extra phases affect nonadiabatic dynamics is the main question that is addressed in this Account. We start by considering the simplest model providing the CI topology: two-dimensional two-state linear vibronic coupling model. Selecting this model instead of a real molecule has the advantage that various dynamical regimes can be easily modeled in the model by varying parameters, whereas any fixed molecule provides the system specific behavior that may not be very illustrative. After demonstrating when GP effects are important and how they modify the dynamics for two sets of initial conditions (starting from the ground and excited electronic states), we give examples of molecular systems where the described GP effects are crucial for adequate description of nonadiabatic dynamics. Interestingly, although the GP has a topological character, the extent to which accounting for GPs affect nuclear dynamics profoundly depends on topography of potential energy surfaces. Understanding an extent of changes introduced by the GP in chemical dynamics poses a problem of capturing GP effects by approximate methods of simulating nonadiabatic dynamics that can go beyond simple models. We assess the performance of both fully quantum (wave packet dynamics) and quantum-classical (surface-hopping, Ehrenfest, and quantum-classical Liouville equation) approaches in various cases where GP effects are important. It has been identified that the key to success in approximate methods is a method organization that prevents the quantum nuclear kinetic energy operator to act directly on adiabatic electronic wave functions.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.509
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.384 · 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