MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3030769802 · doi:10.1088/1361-6455/ab9658

Molecular electronic decoherence following attosecond photoionisation

2020· article· en· W3030769802 on OpenAlexaff
Caroline Arnold, Céline Larivière-Loiselle, Khadijeh Khalili, Ludger Inhester, Ralph Welsch, Robin Santra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics B Atomic Molecular and Optical Physics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersBasic Energy SciencesOffice of ScienceChemical Sciences, Geosciences, and Biosciences DivisionDeutscher Akademischer AustauschdienstDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsAttosecondQuantum decoherencePhysicsPhotoionizationAtomic physicsIonizationQuantum mechanicsQuantumUltrashort pulseLaserIon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Attosecond pulses can be used to generate coherent superpositions of cationic electronic states in molecules through photoionisation. These can drive coherent electronic dynamics, which may decay within a few femtoseconds due to nuclear motion. In this work, we study the impact of the photoelectron on decoherence in the valence electron system of molecules following attosecond photoionisation. To this end, we include the photoelectron as a classical point charge in a quantum–classical simulation of light-induced ultrafast molecular dynamics and consider ionisation by sub-femtosecond pulses with distinct qualities. By disentangling the contributions of photoelectron and nuclei to the overall electronic decoherence, we find that the photoelectron causes partial decoherence within the first 50 attoseconds. This timescale is noticed to be independent of the ionising pulse. Full electronic decoherence is only seen when the spatial extension of the nuclear wave packet is considered.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score0.758

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics B Atomic Molecular and Optical PhysicsSame topicLaser-Matter Interactions and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207