Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Simulating Attochemistry: Which Dynamics Method to Use?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2405.17276 v1 pith:MFEAEPQV submitted 2024-05-27 physics.chem-ph

classification physics.chem-ph
keywords electronicmethodsattochemistrydynamicsmotionquantuminducedmixed
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Attochemistry aims to exploit the properties of coherent electronic wavepackets excited via attosecond pulses, to control the formation of photoproducts. Such molecular processes can in principle be simulated with various nonadiabatic dynamics methods, yet the impact of the approximations underlying the methods is rarely assessed. The performances of widely used mixed quantum-classical approaches, the Tully surface hopping, and classical Ehrenfest methods are evaluated against the high-accuracy DD-vMCG quantum dynamics. This comparison is conducted on the valence ionization of fluorobenzene. Analyzing the nuclear motion induced in the branching space of the nearby conical intersection, the results show that the mixed quantum-classical methods reproduce quantitatively the average motion of a quantum wavepacket when initiated on a single electronic state. However, they fail to properly capture the nuclear motion induced by an electronic wavepacket along the derivative coupling, the latter originating from the quantum electronic coherence property -- key to attochemistry.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Pith tools