Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 70 references

Optical absorption spectroscopy probes water wire and its ordering in a hydrogen-bond network

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The main optical absorption peak of water and ice is a charge-transfer exciton whose intensity in ice is set by the length of proton-ordered water wires.

desk verdict Strong GW-BSE spectra with a plausible but under-supported wire-length scaling claim; worth refereeing, not yet conclusive. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.15688 v1 pith:QDPWXPRX submitted 2024-11-24 cond-mat.mtrl-sci physics.chem-phphysics.comp-ph

Fujie Tang , Diana Y. Qiu , Xifan Wu This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.chem-phphysics.comp-ph
keywords opticalabsorptionspectroscopywaterwireschargetransferexcitonhydrogen-bondnetworkprotonorderingiceXIelectron-holeinteractionGW-BSE
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper argues that the main optical absorption peak of water and ice — the one near 8 eV — is a charge-transfer exciton stretched across hydrogen bonds, and that in ice its strength is boosted by collective excitations on proton-ordered water wires. It claims that the intensity of that peak grows with the ordering length of such wires, reaching a maximum in ice XI, the proton-ordered phase of ice. If correct, optical absorption spectroscopy becomes a direct probe of water-wire presence and length, which matters because water wires are thought to carry protons, energy, and information in biological and confined environments but have never been directly detected. The argument is carried through first-principles many-body calculations on molecular dynamics snapshots, benchmarked against measured spectra.

What carries the argument

The central object is the charge-transfer exciton built from a $1b_1$ lone-pair hole on one water molecule and a $4a_1$ antibonding electron on its hydrogen-bonded neighbor, quantified through the electron-hole overlap density $\rho_h \times \rho_e$ computed from the Bethe-Salpeter eigenstates. The mechanism that carries the argument is the proton-ordered water wire: a chain of hydrogen bonds along which all molecular dipoles point the same way, producing a local polarization field that stabilizes a collective relay of charge-transfer excitons and increases the transition strength. The paper reports that the electron-hole overlap — and with it the oscillator strength and binding energy — increases monotonically with ordering length $l$ and peaks at $l=\infty$ in ice XI, which is what links a standard optical spectrum to a hidden structural motif.

What would settle it

Measure the 8 eV absorption peak in a series of ices whose proton-ordering correlation length is independently varied — for example KOH-doped ice annealed to different degrees — and check whether the peak intensity rises monotonically with the independently measured wire-ordering length; the paper's mechanism predicts monotonic growth, while a flat or saturated curve would falsify the length-scaling claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In both liquid water and ice, the \sim 8 eV absorption peak is a bound exciton of charge-transfer character: an electron is excited from the lone-pair $1b_1$ orbital of a hydrogen-bond acceptor molecule onto the antibonding $4a_1$ orbital centered on the protons of the donor molecule, so the electron-hole pair is stabilized along the hydrogen-bond direction. In ice, where hydrogen bonds are intact and connected into chains, the paper finds that a proton-ordered water wire creates a local polarization field from aligned molecular dipoles; this field stabilizes a collective relay of charge-transfer excitons along the wire, suppresses recombination, and enhances oscillator strength, electron-hole overlap, and exciton binding energy as the ordering length $l$ grows. The binding energy rises from about 2.2 eV in liquid water to about 3.4 eV in ice Ih and about 3.6 eV in ice XI, and the electron-hole overlap density at the first peak increases monotonically from the short-wire limit in water to the infinite-wire limit in ice XI. The paper therefore proposes the spectral intensity of the main peak as a measure of water-wire ordering length.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the calculated electron-hole overlap, averaged over a handful of structural snapshots, tracks the experimental oscillator strength well enough that differences in the 8 eV peak across water, ice Ih, and ice XI can be attributed to water-wire ordering length rather than to other structural differences such as hydrogen-bond strength and density.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The intensity of the \sim 8 eV absorption peak in ice becomes a readout of the presence and ordering length of proton-ordered water wires.
  • The same assignment separates phases of water by wire length: short wires ($l\simeq 2$ hydrogen-bonded pairs) in liquid water, disorder-limited finite wires in ice Ih, and infinite wires in ice XI.
  • Because the exciton is coupled to hydrogen-bond strength, the spectral shape of the main peak can also report the distribution of hydrogen-bond strengths in disordered water.
  • The predicted near-independence of the liquid-water main peak with temperature follows from wires being dominated by single hydrogen-bonded pairs, so changes in the peak height signal ordering rather than thermal population.
  • The approach extends naturally to any ice phase or confined aqueous environment where proton-ordered chains are proposed, offering a spectroscopic route to detect them without scattering-based structural probes.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct extension of the paper's mechanism is that time-resolved optical absorption could watch proton ordering propagate during the ice Ih-to-XI transition, with the 8 eV peak height tracking the growing correlation length.
  • Confined water in protein channels or nanotubes, where transient wires are proposed, would be a natural testbed: the model predicts peak enhancement whenever a wire of length $l\ge 3$ forms.
  • The supplement's scaling relation between electron-hole overlap and molecular dipole moment suggests a quantitative route to infer local polarization from spectral intensity, though the paper only establishes the relation in the systems studied.
  • A still-unstated consequence of the assignment is that standard optical calculations without electron-hole interactions would miss the wire-length signal entirely, so experimental comparisons must be made against excitonic theory.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports GW-BSE calculations of the optical absorption spectra of liquid water, ice Ih, and ice XI, and interprets the main absorption peak near 8 eV as a charge-transfer exciton between hydrogen-bonded water molecules. The authors further propose that in ice this peak is enhanced by a collective excitation occurring on proton-ordered water wires, and that the spectral intensity scales with the ordering length of the water wire. On this basis they argue that optical absorption spectroscopy can serve as a direct probe of water wires and their ordering in hydrogen-bond networks.

Significance. If substantiated, the central claim would be a significant advance: it would turn a standard optical absorption measurement into a structural probe of hydrogen-bond network ordering, with potential applications to confined water, biological systems, and other ice phases. The computational approach is state-of-the-art: the calculations use hybrid-DFT starting points, the GW-BSE method with electron-hole interactions, and the results are compared against experimental spectra for the imaginary and real parts of the dielectric function and for the absorption coefficient. The spectral decomposition into band-to-band contributions and the real-space exciton analysis are carefully presented. However, the load-bearing scaling claim is currently supported by a proxy quantity, the electron-hole overlap, rather than by the directly measured observable, the integrated oscillator strength, and the phase comparison used to establish the trend conflates multiple structural and thermodynamic variables.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 'Collective excitation of charge transfer excitons on water wires', Fig. 4(d), and Supplemental Section VIII] The central prediction that the ~8 eV absorption intensity scales with the water-wire ordering length is supported only by the electron-hole overlap Ω computed from BSE eigenstates, not by the BSE oscillator strength or by the integrated Im ε of the peak. No calculation of the oscillator strength as a function of wire length l is reported, and no demonstration that Ω is proportional to the BSE dipole strength is given. Since BSE oscillator strengths are governed by exciton coefficients and interband velocity matrix elements, Ω is not by construction the optical transition dipole. The authors should directly compute and report the integrated Im ε or BSE oscillator strength for excitons on wires of different l, or otherwise establish quantitatively that Ω tracks the oscillator strength for the same exciton states.
  2. [Fig. 4(c,d) and the liquid/ice Ih/ice XI comparison] The comparison across liquid water, ice Ih, and ice XI changes not only the wire ordering length but also the density, H-bond strength, temperature, and nuclear quantum effects (the latter are included for liquid water via PI-DPMD but treated classically for ice, as stated in Supplemental Section I). The observed monotonic increase in Ω from liquid to ice Ih to ice XI therefore cannot be uniquely attributed to the ordering length. To support the scaling claim, the authors need to isolate the effect of l from the other variables, for example by comparing ice Ih configurations with different wire-length distributions at fixed density and H-bond strength, or by varying the proton order while holding the oxygen lattice fixed.
  3. [Supplemental Section I and Fig. 4(c)] The statistical basis for the quantitative intensity comparison is thin: the liquid-water spectrum is based on two snapshots, the ice Ih spectrum on eight snapshots, and ice XI on a single optimized structure. No error bars or convergence tests with respect to the number of snapshots are provided. Because the central claim concerns relative peak intensities, which are sensitive to configurational sampling, the authors should either provide more snapshots or show that the reported intensity differences are robust to the number of configurations used.
  4. [Supplemental Section VIII, Fig. S7] The fitted relation Ω(P) = 0.005488P² − 0.0327788P + 0.0491024 is based on only three phase-averaged points, has no stated uncertainty, and includes a linear term that is inconsistent with the stated model Ω = kP². The section also explicitly states that the relation is 'solely based on the assumption that the local polar field increases when the length of the water wire is longer.' This is a heuristic assumption, not a derivation from the BSE data, and it should not be used as evidence for the scaling law. The authors should either provide a first-principles derivation of Ω(P) or clearly label the relation as a conjecture and remove it from the argument supporting the main claim.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Fig. 1 caption] The sentence 'The theoretical optical spectra of liquid water was generated' should read 'were generated' for grammatical agreement.
  2. [Results and Discussion, paragraph on ice XI] The word 'energerically' is a typo and should be 'energetically'.
  3. [Supplemental Material throughout] The Supplemental Material contains multiple formatting artifacts, for example the '/ba√︂ex' strings in Section III, which interfere with readability and should be cleaned before publication.
  4. [Main text, section on water wires] The definition of 'water wire' and 'ordering length l' is given through examples rather than a formal definition; a precise definition of what constitutes a wire and how l is counted would improve reproducibility.
  5. [Fig. 4(d)] The three-dimensional plot of the electron-hole overlap as a function of y and l is difficult to read; a two-dimensional plot of the integrated overlap versus l with error bars would more directly support the claimed trend.
  6. [Supplemental Section VI] The statement that in liquid water the wire length is 'l=1 at any temperature' appears to conflict with the earlier use of l=2 for H-bonded pairs; the terminology should be clarified to avoid confusion.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 3.0 of 10

The water-wire scaling claim rests on a fitted Ω(P) relation and an unvalidated proxy; the core GW-BSE exciton assignment itself is not circular.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Supplemental Material, Section VIII (Local polar fields along the water wire in ice Ih), Fig. S7]
    "Let us consider an approximation, if the excited electron (hole) density on a water molecule is proportional (inversely proportional) to the local polar field P, then the electron-hole overlap (Ω) can be written as Ω = kP²... The above relation is solely based on the assumption that the local polar field is increases when the length of the water wire is longer. ... The fitting function is Ω(P) = 0.005488∗P²−0.0327788∗P+0.0491024."

    The paper's central prediction is that the ~8 eV spectral intensity scales with the ordering length of proton-ordered water wires. The quantitative support for this is Fig. 4(d), which plots the BSE-derived electron-hole overlap Ω versus wire length l. Section VIII then fits Ω(P) to the same three phase-averaged data points (liquid, ice Ih, ice XI) and justifies the fit solely by assuming that the local polar field P increases with wire length. The claimed scaling thus reduces to that assumption plus a three-point fit to the very Ω values used to display the trend; it is not an independent prediction of oscillator strength versus l.

full rationale

The central assignment of the main absorption peak to a charge-transfer exciton is not circular: it is obtained from GW-BSE eigenstates, decomposed by band character, and compared with experimental spectra. Exciton binding energies and real-space electron/hole densities are computed outputs, not inputs. The water-wire mechanism, however, is supported by Fig. 4(d), which plots electron-hole overlap Ω versus wire length l, and by Supplemental Section VIII, which fits Ω(P) to the three phase-averaged dipole moments. That fit is introduced with the explicit assumption that the local polar field increases with wire length, so it cannot independently establish the scaling claim. Moreover, the main text asserts that the increased Ω 'correlates with an enhanced exciton oscillator strength' without reporting BSE oscillator strengths versus l, so the central prediction remains a proxy correlation. Self-citations (Refs. 16, 26, 42, S1, S2) supply the deep-potential model and snapshot-selection methodology, but they are normal methodology reuse and do not import an unproven uniqueness theorem or forbid alternatives. On balance, the core spectroscopic assignment is self-contained, but the wire-ordering scaling claim is partially supported by a fitted relation and an unvalidated proxy, giving a moderate circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard many-body perturbation theory plus several domain-specific modeling choices: the decomposition of ice into water wires, the use of electron-hole overlap as an intensity proxy, and an assumed quadratic relation between overlap and local polar field. No new physical entities are introduced. The empirical blue shifts and a three-parameter fit in the SI are the main free parameters.

free parameters (5)
  • Empirical blue shift for liquid water spectrum = ~0.6 eV
    Applied to align the calculated first absorption peak with the experimental peak in Fig. 1(a); this is a shift parameter, not a prediction.
  • Empirical blue shift for ice spectrum = ~0.8 eV
    Applied to align the calculated ice spectrum with experiment in Fig. 1(b).
  • Gaussian broadening = 0.4 eV
    Chosen to match the width of the first experimental peak; broadens all calculated spectra.
  • Quasiparticle gap rigid shift = unspecified, convergence within 1 eV
    A rigid shift applied at BSE level to compensate for G0W0 underconvergence; the amount is not stated numerically.
  • Electron-hole overlap vs dipole moment fit coefficients = 0.005488, -0.0327788, 0.0491024
    Three-parameter quadratic fitted to computed overlap data in Supplemental Section VIII to support the Ω=kP^2 relation; the relation is assumed and then fitted, not derived.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math GW-BSE many-body perturbation theory with Tamm-Dancoff approximation accurately describes the optical excitations of water and ice.
    The central spectra are computed with this framework; its validity for these systems is assumed from prior literature.
  • domain assumption The H-bond network in ice can be partitioned into quasi-one-dimensional water wires with a well-defined proton-ordering length l.
    Used in Fig. 4(a) and throughout the water-wire analysis; the definition of ordering length from consecutive H-bonds is a modeling choice.
  • domain assumption The electron-hole overlap density ρh×ρe is a faithful proxy for optical oscillator strength.
    Used in Fig. 3(c), 4(d) and Section VIII to connect computed exciton densities to spectral intensity.
  • ad hoc to paper The local polar field along a wire increases monotonically with ordering length, and the relation Ω=kP^2 holds.
    Assumed in Supplemental Section VIII, then fitted to computed data; the linearized relation ΔΩ=2kPΔP is used to argue the ordering-length scaling.
  • domain assumption Gamma-point-only sampling with a 32-molecule cell is sufficient for the optical spectra.
    Stated in Supplemental Section II, citing previous studies; this limits k-point sampling for the BSE.
  • domain assumption Nuclear quantum effects do not significantly change the ice optical spectra.
    Stated in Supplemental Section I to justify classical DPMD for ice at 80 K instead of PI-DPMD.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Optical absorption spectroscopy probes water wire and its ordering in a hydrogen-bond network." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QDPWXPRX

@misc{pith2026241115688,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Optical absorption spectroscopy probes water wire and its ordering in a hydrogen-bond network},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QDPWXPRX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.15688}
}
abstract

Water wires, quasi-one-dimensional chains composed of hydrogen-bonded (H-bonded) water molecules, play a fundamental role in numerous chemical, physical, and physiological processes. Yet direct experimental detection of water wires has been elusive so far. Based on advanced $ab$ $initio$ many-body theory that includes electron-hole interactions, we report that optical absorption spectroscopy can serve as a sensitive probe of water wires and their ordering. In both liquid and solid water, the main peak of the spectrum is discovered to be a charge transfer exciton. In water, the charge transfer exciton is strongly coupled to the H-bonding environment where the exciton is excited between H-bonded water molecules with a large spectral intensity. In regular ice, the spectral weight of the charge transfer exciton is enhanced by a collective excitation occurring on proton-ordered water wires, whose spectral intensity scales with the ordering length of water wire. The spectral intensity and excitonic interaction strength reaches its maximum in ice XI, where the long-range ordering length yields the most pronounced spectral signal. Our findings suggest that water wires, which widely exist in important physiological and biological systems and other phases of ice, can be directly probed by this approach.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.15688 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The experimental and theoretical optical absorp [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) Schematic of band-to-band transitions con [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a) The schematic of the H-bond and proton transfer coordinate ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Exciton corresponding to the first peak of optical spectra and molecular structure of Ice Ih (a) and Ice XI (b). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

70 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    X. Su, L. Lianos, Y. R. Shen, and G. A. Somorjai, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 1533 (1998)

    work page 1998

  2. [2]

    Dellago, M

    C. Dellago, M. M. Naor, and G. Hummer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 105902 (2003)

    work page 2003

  3. [3]

    Freier, S

    E. Freier, S. Wolf, and K. Gerwert, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108, 11435 (2011)

    work page 2011

  4. [4]

    Hassanali, M

    A. Hassanali, M. K. Prakash, H. Eshet, and M. Par- rinello, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108, 20410 (2011)

    work page 2011

  5. [5]

    Paulino, M

    J. Paulino, M. Yi, I. Hung, Z. Gan, X. Wang, E. Y. Chekmenev, H. X. Zhou, and T. A. Cross, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 117, 11908 (2020)

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Li and G

    C. Li and G. A. Voth, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 118, 1 (2021)

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    Lasave, S

    J. Lasave, S. Koval, A. Laio, and E. Tosatti, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 118, e2018837118 (2021)

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    H. T. Kratochvil, L. C. Watkins, M. Mravic, J. L. Thomaston, J. M. Nicoludis, N. H. Somberg, L. Liu, M. Hong, G. A. Voth, and W. F. Degrado, Nat. Chem. 15, 1012–1021 (2023)

    work page 2023

Show all 70 references
  1. [9]

    Hummer, Mol

    G. Hummer, Mol. Phy. 105, 201 (2007)

    2007

  2. [10]

    Halle and G

    B. Halle and G. Karlstr¨ om, J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans. 2 79, 1047 (1983)

    1983

  3. [11]

    C. W. Swartz and X. Wu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 087801 (2013)

    2013

  4. [12]

    Bek¸ cio˘ glu, C

    G. Bek¸ cio˘ glu, C. Allolio, and D. Sebastiani, J. Phys. Chem. B 119, 4053 (2015)

    2015

  5. [13]

    Agmon, H

    N. Agmon, H. J. Bakker, R. K. Campen, R. H. Hench- man, P. Pohl, S. Roke, M. Th¨ amer, and A. Hassanali, Chem. Rev. 116, 7642 (2016)

    2016

  6. [14]

    M. Chen, L. Zheng, B. Santra, H. Y. Ko, R. A. Distasio, M. L. Klein, R. Car, and X. Wu, Nat. Chem. 10, 413 (2018)

    2018

  7. [15]

    A. R. Walker, B. Wu, J. Meisner, M. D. Fayer, and T. J. Mart´ ınez, J. Phys. Chem. B125, 12539 (2021)

    2021

  8. [16]

    F. Tang, J. Xu, D. Y. Qiu, and X. Wu, Phys. Rev. B 104, 035117 (2021)

    2021

  9. [17]

    A. K. Soper, Int. Sch. Res. Notices 2013, 279463 (2013)

    2013

  10. [18]

    L. B. Skinner, C. Huang, D. Schlesinger, L. G. M. Pet- tersson, A. Nilsson, and C. J. Benmore, J. Chem. Phys. 138, 074506 (2013)

    2013

  11. [19]

    Schmidt, Optical Spectroscopy in Chemistry and Life Sciences: An Introduction (Wiley, 2005)

    W. Schmidt, Optical Spectroscopy in Chemistry and Life Sciences: An Introduction (Wiley, 2005)

    2005

  12. [20]

    W. W. Parson, Modern optical spectroscopy , Vol. 2 (Springer, 2007)

    2007

  13. [21]

    K. F. Mak, L. Ju, F. Wang, and T. F. Heinz, Solid State Commun. 152, 1341 (2012)

    2012

  14. [22]

    Wernet, D

    P. Wernet, D. Nordlund, U. Bergmann, M. Cavalleri, M. Odelius, H. Ogasawara, L. A. Naslund, T. K. Hirsch, L. Ojamae, P. Glatzel, L. G. M. Pettersson, and A. Nils- son, Science 304, 995 (2004)

    2004

  15. [23]

    J. S. Tse, D. M. Shaw, D. D. Klug, S. Patchkovskii, G. Vank´ o, G. Monaco, and M. Krisch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 095502 (2008)

    2008

  16. [24]

    Fransson, Y

    T. Fransson, Y. Harada, N. Kosugi, N. A. Besley, B. Win- ter, J. J. Rehr, L. G. Pettersson, and A. Nilsson, Chem. Rev. 116, 7551 (2016)

    2016

  17. [25]

    J. W. Smith and R. J. Saykally, Chem. Rev. 117, 13909 (2017)

    2017

  18. [26]

    F. Tang, Z. Li, C. Zhang, S. G. Louie, R. Car, D. Y. Qiu, and X. Wu, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 119, e2201258119 (2022)

    2022

  19. [27]

    F. Tang, K. Shi, and X. Wu, J. Chem. Phys. 159, 174501 (2023). 8

    2023

  20. [28]

    P. H. Hahn, W. G. Schmidt, K. Seino, M. Preuss, F. Bechstedt, and J. Bernholc, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 037404 (2005)

    2005

  21. [29]

    Garbuio, M

    V. Garbuio, M. Cascella, L. Reining, R. D. Sole, and O. Pulci, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 137402 (2006)

    2006

  22. [30]

    Hermann, W

    A. Hermann, W. G. Schmidt, and P. Schwerdtfeger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 207403 (2008)

    2008

  23. [31]

    Hermann and P

    A. Hermann and P. Schwerdtfeger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 187403 (2011)

    2011

  24. [32]

    Vinson, J

    J. Vinson, J. J. Kas, F. D. Vila, J. J. Rehr, and E. L. Shirley, Phys. Rev. B 85, 045101 (2012)

    2012

  25. [33]

    Garbuio, M

    V. Garbuio, M. Cascella, I. Kupchak, O. Pulci, and A. P. Seitsonen, J. Chem. Phys. 143, 084507 (2015)

    2015

  26. [34]

    Ziaei and T

    V. Ziaei and T. Bredow, J. Chem. Phys. 145, 064508 (2016)

    2016

  27. [35]

    N. L. Nguyen, H. Ma, M. Govoni, F. Gygi, and G. Galli, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 237402 (2019)

    2019

  28. [36]

    M. V. Fern´ andez-Serra and E. Artacho, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 016404 (2006)

    2006

  29. [37]

    Kumar, J

    R. Kumar, J. R. Schmidt, and J. L. Skinner, J. Chem. Phys. 126, 204107 (2007)

    2007

  30. [38]

    Perakis, L

    F. Perakis, L. De Marco, A. Shalit, F. Tang, Z. R. Kann, T. D. K¨ uhne, R. Torre, M. Bonn, and Y. Nagata, Chem. Rev. 116, 7590 (2016)

    2016

  31. [39]

    M. S. Hybertsen and S. G. Louie, Phys. Rev. B 34, 5390 (1986)

    1986

  32. [40]

    Rohlfing and S

    M. Rohlfing and S. G. Louie, Phys. Rev. B 62, 4927 (2000)

    2000

  33. [41]

    Deslippe, G

    J. Deslippe, G. Samsonidze, D. A. Strubbe, M. Jain, M. L. Cohen, and S. G. Louie, Comput. Phys. Commun. 183, 1269 (2012)

    2012

  34. [42]

    Zhang, F

    C. Zhang, F. Tang, M. Chen, J. Xu, L. Zhang, D. Y. Qiu, J. P. Perdew, M. L. Klein, and X. Wu, J. Phys. Chem. B 125, 11444 (2021)

    2021

  35. [43]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865 (1996)

    1996

  36. [44]

    J. P. Perdew, M. Ernzerhof, and K. Burke, J. Chem. Phys. 105, 9982 (1996)

    1996

  37. [45]

    Adamo and V

    C. Adamo and V. Barone, J. Chem. Phys. 110, 6158 (1999)

    1999

  38. [46]

    Faber, P

    C. Faber, P. Boulanger, I. Duchemin, C. Attaccalite, and X. Blase, J. Chem. Phys. 139, 194308 (2013)

    2013

  39. [47]

    Caruso, V

    F. Caruso, V. Atalla, X. Ren, A. Rubio, M. Scheffler, and P. Rinke, Phys. Rev. B 90, 085141 (2014)

    2014

  40. [48]

    Kaplan, F

    F. Kaplan, F. Weigend, F. Evers, and M. J. van Setten, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 11, 5152 (2015)

    2015

  41. [49]

    Ceriotti, G

    M. Ceriotti, G. Bussi, and M. Parrinello, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 030603 (2009)

    2009

  42. [50]

    Ceriotti and D

    M. Ceriotti and D. E. Manolopoulos, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 100604 (2012)

    2012

  43. [51]

    J. D. Bernal and R. H. Fowler, J. Chem. Phys. 1, 515 (1933)

    1933

  44. [52]

    Rahman and F

    A. Rahman and F. H. Stillinger, J. Chem. Phys. 57, 4009 (1972)

    1972

  45. [53]

    Giannozzi, O

    P. Giannozzi, O. Andreussi, T. Brumme, O. Bunau, M. B. Nardelli, M. Calandra, R. Car, C. Cavazzoni, D. Ceresoli, M. Cococcioni, N. Colonna, I. Carnimeo, A. D. Corso, S. de Gironcoli, P. Delugas, R. A. DiStasio, A. Ferretti, A. Floris, G. Fratesi, G. Fugallo, R. Gebauer, U. Ger...

    2017

  46. [54]

    A. J. Cohen, P. Mori-S´ anchez, and W. Yang, Science321, 792 (2008)

    2008

  47. [55]

    A. J. Cohen, P. Mori-S´ anchez, and W. Yang, Chem. Rev. 112, 289 (2012)

    2012

  48. [56]

    D. R. Hamann, Phys. Rev. B 88, 085117 (2013)

    2013

  49. [57]

    Hayashi and N

    H. Hayashi and N. Hiraoka, J. Phys. Chem. B 119, 5609 (2015)

    2015

  50. [58]

    Kobayashi, J

    K. Kobayashi, J. Phys. Chem. 87, 4317 (1983)

    1983

  51. [59]

    Ceriotti, J

    M. Ceriotti, J. Cuny, M. Parrinello, and D. E. Manolopoulos, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 110, 15591 (2013)

    2013

  52. [60]

    Z. Sun, L. Zheng, M. Chen, M. L. Klein, F. Paesani, and X. Wu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 137401 (2018)

    2018

  53. [61]

    S. M. Jackson and R. W. Whitworth, J. Phys. Chem. B 101, 6177 (1997)

    1997

  54. [62]

    J.-L. Kuo, M. L. Klein, and W. F. Kuhs, J. Chem. Phys. 123, 134505 (2005)

    2005

  55. [63]

    Tajima, T

    Y. Tajima, T. Matsuo, and H. Suga, Nature 299, 810 (1982)

    1982

  56. [64]

    Kapil, C

    V. Kapil, C. Schran, A. Zen, J. Chen, C. J. Pickard, and A. Michaelides, Nature 609, 512 (2022)

    2022

  57. [65]

    Ravindra, X

    P. Ravindra, X. R. Advincula, C. Schran, A. Michaelides, and V. Kapil, Nat. Commun. 15, 7301 (2024)

    2024

  58. [66]

    P. W. Bridgman, Proc. Am. Acad. Arts Sci. 47, 441 (1912)

    1912

  59. [67]

    P. W. Bridgman, J. Chem. Phys. 5, 964 (1937)

    1937

  60. [68]

    V. F. Petrenko and R. W. Whitworth, Physics of Ice (Oxford University Press, 2002)

    2002

  61. [69]

    C. G. Salzmann, P. G. Radaelli, E. Mayer, and J. L. Finney, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 105701 (2009)

    2009

  62. [70]

    Optical absorption spectroscopy probes water wire and its ordering in a hydrogen-bond network

    L. Zhang, H. Wang, R. Car, and W. E, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 236001 (2021). Supplemental Material for “Optical absorption spectroscopy probes water wire and its ordering in a hydrogen-bond network” Fujie Tang,1, 2 Diana Y. Qiu, 3,∗ and Xifan Wu 1,† 1Department of Physics, Temple...

    2021 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.