Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nonadiabatic coupling of electronic and vibrational degrees of freedom is the defining feature of electronically excited states of polyatomic molecules. Once considered a theoretical curiosity, conical intersections (CIs) are now generally accepted as being the dominant source of coupled charge and vibrational energy flow in molecular excited states. Passage through CIs leads to the conversion of electronic to vibrational energy, which drives the ensuing photochemistry, isomerization being a canonical example. It has often been remarked that the CI may be thought of as a transition state in the excited state. As such, we expect that both the direction and the velocity of approach to the CI will matter. We explore this suggestion by looking for dynamical aspects of passage through CIs and for analogies with well-known concepts from ground-state reaction dynamics. Great progress has been made in the development of both experimental techniques and ab initio dynamics simulations, to a degree that direct comparisons may now be made. Here we compare time-resolved photoelectron spectroscopy results with on-the-fly ab initio multiple spawning calculations of the experimental observables, thereby validating each. We adopt a phenomenological approach and specifically concentrate on the excited-state dynamics of the C=C bond in unsaturated hydrocarbons. In particular, we make use of selective chemical substitution (such as replacing an H atom by a methyl group) so as to alter the inertia of certain vibrations relative to others, thus systematically varying (mass-weighted) directions and velocities of approach to a CI. Chemical substituents, however, may affect both the nuclear and electronic components of the total wave function. The former, which we call an inertial effect, influences the direction and velocity of approach. The latter, which we call a potential effect, modifies the electronic structure and therefore the energetic location and topography of the potential energy surfaces involved. Using a series of examples, we discuss both types of effects. We argue that there is a need for dynamical pictures and simple models of nonadiabatic dynamics at CIs and hope that the phenomenology presented here will help inspire such developments.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".