MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989749076 · doi:10.1038/s41467-019-13251-w

Symmetry of molecular Rydberg states revealed by XUV transient absorption spectroscopy

2019· article· en· W2989749076 on OpenAlexafffund
Peng Peng, Claude Marceau, Marius Hervé, P. B. Corkum, A. Naumov, D. M. Villeneuve

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsJoint Attosecond Science LaboratoryUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsRydberg formulaExtreme ultravioletSpectroscopyAtomic physicsPhysicsUltrafast laser spectroscopyAbsorption spectroscopySymmetry (geometry)Transient (computer programming)Absorption (acoustics)Rydberg stateMolecular physicsLaserQuantum mechanicsOpticsIonizationIonComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transient absorption spectroscopy is utilized extensively for measurements of bound- and quasibound-state dynamics of atoms and molecules. The extension of this technique into the extreme ultraviolet (XUV) region with attosecond pulses has the potential to attain unprecedented time resolution. Here we apply this technique to aligned-in-space molecules. The XUV pulses are much shorter than the time during which the molecules remain aligned, typically [Formula: see text]100 fs. However, transient absorption is not an instantaneous probe, because long-lived coherences re-emit for picoseconds to nanoseconds. Due to dephasing of the rotational wavepacket, it is not clear if these coherences will be evident in the absorption spectrum, and whether the properties of the initial excitations will be preserved. We studied Rydberg states of N[Formula: see text] and O[Formula: see text] from 12 to 23 eV. We were able to determine the polarization direction of the electronic transitions, and hence identify the symmetry of the final states.

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 score0.467
Threshold uncertainty score0.541

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations36
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicLaser-Matter Interactions and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207