MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tracking the Ionization Site in Neutral Molecules

2021· article· en· W3213921807 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsJoint Attosecond Science LaboratoryUniversity of Ottawa
FundersBasic Energy SciencesU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsIonizationDiatomic moleculeElectronElectron ionizationWave packetPhotoionizationTunnel ionizationField desorptionBound state

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When a diatomic molecule is exposed to intense light, the valence electron may tunnel from a higher potential (corresponding to an upfield atom) due to the suppressed internuclear barrier. This process is known as ionization enhancement and is a key mechanism in strong field ionization of molecules. Alternatively, the bound electron wave function can evolve adiabatically in the laser field, resulting in ionization from the downfield atom. Here, we introduce a method to quantify the relative contribution of these two processes. Applying this method to experimentally measured electron momenta distributions following strong field ionization of N_{2} with infrared laser light, we find approximately a 2∶1 ratio of electrons ionized from a downfield atom, relative to upfield. This suggests that the bound state wave function largely adapts adiabatically to the changing laser field, although the nonadiabatic process of ionization enhancement still contributes even in neutral molecules. Our method can be applied to any diatomic neutral molecule to better understand the evolution of the initially bound electron wave packet and hence the nature of the molecular ionization process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicLaser-Matter Interactions and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207