Strengthening the case for interatomic Coulomb decay as a subdominant reaction channel in slow <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>3</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mtext>−</mml:mtext><mml:msub><mml:mi>Ne</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math> collisions with independent-atom-model coupled-channel calculations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report on electron removal calculations for 2.81 keV/amu ${\mathrm{Li}}^{3+}$ and ${\mathrm{O}}^{3+}$ ion collisions with neon dimers. The target is described as two independent neon atoms fixed at the dimer's equilibrium bond length, whose electrons are subjected to the time-dependent bare and screened Coulomb potentials of the classically moving ${\mathrm{Li}}^{3+}$ and ${\mathrm{O}}^{3+}$ projectile ions, respectively. Three mutually perpendicular orientations of the dimer with respect to the rectilinear projectile trajectories are considered and collision events for the two ion-atom subsystems are combined in an impact parameter by impact parameter fashion and are orientation averaged to calculate probabilities and cross sections for the ion-dimer system. The coupled-channel two-center basis generator method is used to solve the ion-atom collision problems. We concentrate the ion-dimer analysis on one-electron and two-electron removal processes which can be associated with interatomic Coulomb decay, Coulomb explosion, and radiative charge transfer. We find that the calculated relative yields are in fair agreement with recent experimental data for ${\mathrm{O}}^{3+}\text{\ensuremath{-}}{\mathrm{Ne}}_{2}$ collisions if we represent the projectile by a screened Coulomb potential, but disagree markedly for a bare Coulomb potential, i.e., for ${\mathrm{Li}}^{3+}$ impact. In particular, our calculations suggest that interatomic Coulomb decay is a significant reaction channel in the former case only, since capture of a $\mathrm{Ne}(2s$) electron to form hydrogenlike ${\mathrm{Li}}^{2+}$ is unlikely.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.205 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".