Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 149 references

Diatomic molecular anions of alkali-metal and alkaline-earth-metal atoms

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A uniform computational survey maps the ground states of all 57 alkali-metal and alkali-alkaline-earth diatomic anions.

desk verdict A solid, comprehensive dataset paper for 57 alkali/alkaline-earth diatomic anions, with a real but localized soft spot: the few-percent accuracy claim is extrapolated to the heavy Fr/Ra species without a spin-orbit or heavy-element benchmark. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.05067 v1 pith:3PBQNIQC submitted 2026-08-05 physics.atom-ph physics.chem-ph

Sana Akkari , Hela Ladjimi , Wissem Zrafi , Hamid Berriche , Marcin Gronowski , Micha{l} Tomza This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.atom-phphysics.chem-ph PACS 31.15.A31.15.Ar33.15.-e
keywords molecularanionsalkali-metaldimersalkaline-earthatomscoupledclusterpotentialenergycurvesdipole-boundstateselectronaffinityultracoldcollisions
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

This paper sets out to provide a uniform, high-accuracy computational description of all 57 diatomic anions formed from an alkali-metal atom plus either a second alkali-metal atom or an alkaline-earth-metal atom. For most of these species no reliable potential energy curves or spectroscopic constants existed before, so the paper aims to supply reference data where experiment and theory are missing. It computes ground-state potential curves, well depths, vibrational and rotational constants, permanent dipole moments, and static polarizabilities, along with excited valence and dipole-bound states for selected species. If the calculations are right, these molecules become accessible to planned cold-collision and Rydberg-electron experiments, and photoelectron spectra of the anions can be assigned against a consistent theoretical grid.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the composite interaction energy $V_{\mathrm{int}}(R) = V^{\mathrm{apwCV5Z+bf}}_{\mathrm{CCSD(T)}}(R) + \delta V^{\mathrm{apwCVTZ}}_{\mathrm{CCSDT}}(R)$, where the second term adds the iterative-triples correction computed as CCSDT minus CCSD(T) in a smaller basis. Around this the paper wraps counterpoise-corrected supermolecule energies, a core-valence quintuple-zeta basis with bond functions, Stuttgart small-core pseudopotentials, and a custom even-tempered diffuse Gaussian sequence at the bond midpoint for dipole-bound states. EOM-EA-CCSD supplies the dipole-bound electron binding energies, MRCISD supplies the excited-state curves, and Dunham fits turn the potentials into spectroscopic constants.

What would settle it

Photoelectron spectroscopy of an unstudied heteronuclear anion such as LiBa$^-$ or CsRa$^-$ would measure the adiabatic electron affinity and vibrational spacings; if the measured binding energy differed from the predicted value by more than roughly 200 cm$^{-1}$ for LiBa$^-$, the uniform accuracy claim would fail for that class. Alternatively, a microwave or Rydberg-spectroscopy measurement of the dipole-bound state of NaCs$^-$ could test the predicted binding energy directly.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a composite CCSD(T)+ΔT method, with large core-valence basis sets and small-core relativistic pseudopotentials, yields ground-state potential energy curves accurate to a few percent for all 21 alkali-metal diatomic anions (X$^{2}\Sigma^{+}$) and all 36 alkali-metal--alkaline-earth-metal anions (X$^{1}\Sigma^{+}$). The paper further claims that the excited A$^{2}\Sigma^{+}$ states of the alkali-metal anions cross the neutral ground-state curves, producing temporary anionic states embedded in the electron-detachment continuum, and that six polar molecules support dipole-bound states whose binding energies grow near-linearly with the neutral dipole moment. These crossings and dipole-bound states are presented as a mechanism for resonant electron attachment in ultracold mixtures of ground-state molecules and Rydberg atoms.

Load-bearing premise

The entire dataset inherits the accuracy of a single composite method whose few-percent error bar is inferred from two representative anions (KRb$^-$ and RbSr$^-$) and from atomic benchmarks, with spin-orbit coupling neglected for the heaviest elements, so individual heavy-anion well depths could lie outside the stated uncertainty.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Photoelectron spectra of the nine experimentally studied anions can be re-examined against a single consistent set of curves, and the remaining 48 species now have predicted well depths and vibrational spacings to test.
  • The predicted neutral--anion curve crossings identify internuclear distances where electron attachment should be resonantly enhanced, giving Rydberg--molecule experiments specific targets.
  • Dipole-bound binding energies for NaCs$^-$ and LiCs$^-$ are large enough relative to the rotational constants that many rotational levels should lie below the detachment threshold, a regime open to high-resolution spectroscopy.
  • The reported dipole moments and polarizabilities provide the input needed to estimate trap-induced Stark shifts and long-range interactions in hybrid ion-atom systems.
  • The uniform treatment makes possible systematic trends---well depth falling with increasing atomic size, Ba-containing anions deepest---that can guide which species to try to form and cool.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the crossing picture is right, the same temporary-anion mechanism should operate for other polar neutrals with sufficiently large excited-state dipole moments, extending the Rydberg-attachment idea beyond the alkali-metal set.
  • The near-linear dipole-bound binding energy versus dipole moment correlation, demonstrated here for six related molecules, could be tested as a scaling rule for other polar molecules and would let experimentalists estimate binding from a measured dipole alone.
  • The absence of spin-orbit coupling for Fr and Ra means the true heavy-anion curves may split into multiple components; resolving this would require a two-component treatment the present data cannot distinguish.
  • The predicted data could underpin a search for laser-coolable molecular anions: any anion with a bound excited state of opposite parity within the alkali set would be a candidate for optical cycling.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a systematic computational study of 57 diatomic molecular anions formed from alkali-metal and alkali-metal–alkaline-earth-metal atoms. Using a composite CCSD(T)+ΔT scheme with large Gaussian basis sets and small-core relativistic energy-consistent pseudopotentials, the authors compute ground-state potential energy curves, spectroscopic constants, permanent dipole moments, and static electric dipole polarizabilities for all species. They also investigate selected excited states with MRCISD and EOM-EA-CCSD, including dipole-bound states for six polar molecules, and predict crossings between neutral ground-state and excited anionic-state curves. The results are benchmarked against atomic properties and experimental well depths for nine alkali-dimer anions (mean absolute deviation 3.4%), and basis-set and correlation-convergence tests are performed for KRb− and RbSr−.

Significance. If the accuracy claims hold, this is a valuable reference dataset: it provides the first high-level predictions for most of the alkali-metal–alkaline-earth-metal anions, which are largely unexplored experimentally, and it identifies several strongly polar anions with large dipole moments and potential dipole-bound states. The methodological validation is a notable strength: no parameters are fitted to the target molecular data, the atomic benchmarks are external, and the basis-set and correlation convergence is demonstrated for representative species. The main weakness is that the global few-percent accuracy claim is extrapolated to the heaviest (Fr- and Ra-containing) species without a dedicated benchmark or spin–orbit treatment, and the crossing prediction rests on unvalidated MRCISD excited-state curves.

major comments (3)
  1. [§III E and §IV (surface accuracy claim)] The statement in Section IV that the calculated well depths are accurate to within a few percent is not supported for the 12 anions containing Fr or Ra. The only molecular validations are the two convergence tests on KRb− and RbSr− in Section III E and the empirical comparison with nine alkali-dimer anions in Table II, none of which contains Fr or Ra. The atomic benchmarks in Table I show the largest deviations for Fr (ionization potential off by 421 cm⁻¹, S–P excitation energy by 300 cm⁻¹) and Ra (IP off by 365 cm⁻¹), and the method uses scalar-relativistic ECPs with no spin–orbit coupling. Since second-order spin–orbit effects on Σ states grow with Z, an error of several percent in the well depths of Fr/Ra-containing anions cannot be excluded. I recommend adding a benchmark for at least one heavy system (e.g., CsFr− or FrBa− with spin–orbit treatment) or, failing that, restricting the few-percent claim to species without Fr/Ra and assigning a larger uncertainty to the heavy end.
  2. [§III B, Fig. 1] The predicted crossings between the neutral ground state and the excited A²Σ+ anionic state, which motivate the resonant-electron-attachment scenario in the abstract and conclusions, are based on MRCISD curves for only Li₂⁻, RbCs⁻, and NaCs⁻. The authors appropriately label the continuum-embedded portions as approximate diabatic continuations, but they do not quantify how the crossing position depends on the level of theory or on the uncertainty of the atomic asymptotes. Given that the atomic excitation energies in Table I carry errors of up to 300 cm⁻¹, the crossing could shift significantly or disappear for some species. A sensitivity analysis (e.g., shifting the curves by the atomic EA/excitation-energy uncertainties, or comparing the A-state with EOM-EA-CCSD) should be included before the crossing prediction is presented as a robust finding.
  3. [§III D–E and Tables II–III] Although the abstract states that the authors assess convergence and uncertainties of their results, the uncertainty analysis is limited to two representative species and a global few-percent statement. Tables II and III present D_e, R_e, ω_e, dipole moments, and polarizabilities for 57 species without any per-species uncertainty estimate. The spread among the CI variants in Fig. 7 and the basis-set differences in Fig. 6 suggest that the error could vary substantially across the periodic table (e.g., the ΔT correction ranges from 2.4% to 3.4% between the two classes, and the CBS extrapolation residual differs between KRb− and RbSr−). I recommend reporting at least the estimated absolute uncertainty in D_e and R_e for each species, or providing a clear scaling relationship based on the atomic benchmarks.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Reference [100]] Reference [100] appears to be malformed: the bibliographic entry is replaced by a list of bond-function exponents. Please restore the proper citation (apparently to Tao and Pan, J. Chem. Phys. 97, 4989 (1992)) and move the exponents to the text or Supplemental Material.
  2. [§III D, electron affinity formula] The text says that the electronic adiabatic electron affinities use the experimental electron affinities of the constituent atoms, but for Fr the Table I value is theoretical (Ref. [125]). Please clarify that for species with no experimental atomic EA, the calculated atomic EA is used.
  3. [Table II and §III D1] The 3.4% mean absolute deviation is a central validation number, but Table II lists two experimental well depths for Rb₂⁻ and Cs₂⁻ (from Refs. [76] and [77]) without specifying which is used in the nine-species statistics. Please state explicitly which experimental values enter the mean deviation and error budget.
  4. [Figure 3 caption] The basis-set label 'apVQZ' is used without definition in the figure caption or text; please define it (e.g., as aug-cc-pVQZ) and clarify that the diffuse functions are the even-tempered sets described in Section II.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central PECs are computed ab initio with no fitted target-data parameters, and the self-citations to prior work are not load-bearing for the main claims.

full rationale

The central quantity of the paper, the ground-state potential energy curves for 57 molecular anions, is obtained from the composite CCSD(T)+ΔT scheme in Eq. (1), built from counterpoise-corrected supermolecular interaction energies in Eqs. (2) and (3). No parameter appearing in this construction is fitted to the molecular data being predicted; the only empirical inputs are atomic electron affinities used for dissociation-limit bookkeeping and for plotting vertical shifts, and these are external experimental or high-level theoretical benchmarks. The accuracy claims are supported by independent checks: atomic properties in Table I against experimental and high-level theoretical references, convergence tests on KRb− and RbSr− in Section III E, and comparisons with experimental well depths for nine alkali-dimer anions (mean absolute deviation 3.4%). The paper does use self-citations: the composite method is said to have been applied and validated in Refs. [24,93–96], and the neutral-molecule well depths D_e(AB), equilibrium geometries, and dipole moments used for electron affinities and dipole-bound-state calculations are taken from Ref. [96] by the same group. These are borrowed inputs or methodological precedents, but they are not the target predictions: the anionic PECs, dipole moments, and polarizabilities are computed independently and would not be logically forced if Ref. [96] were incorrect. The reported electron affinities E_EA(AB) do depend on D_e(AB) from Ref. [96], but this is a secondary derived quantity, not the central claim of first accurate PECs, and the comparison with experimental electron affinities uses independent measurements. No definitional equivalence, no fit-then-predict sleight, no uniqueness theorem imported from the authors, and no ansatz smuggled in by citation was found. The remaining concern about spin–orbit coupling for Fr- and Ra-containing species is a correctness or uncertainty issue, not a circularity. Thus the derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks, and the presence of minor self-citations does not make the central claim circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The calculations introduce no free parameters fitted to the target data. The main inputs are standard basis sets, pseudopotentials, and experimental atomic electron affinities. The principal non-verified assumptions are the transfer of the composite scheme to all 57 species and the neglect of spin-orbit coupling in heavy systems.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Born-Oppenheimer approximation separates electronic and nuclear motion for all PECs.
    Invoked implicitly throughout Section II; standard for molecular potential curves but not exact.
  • domain assumption Single-reference CCSD(T) plus perturbative-then-iterative triples is adequate across the full range of R for all 57 ground states.
    Stated in Section II; tested only for KRb- and RbSr- in Section III E (Figs. 6 and 7).
  • domain assumption Scalar-relativistic energy-consistent pseudopotentials without spin-orbit terms describe the heavy atoms (K through Ra) accurately.
    Section II replaces inner shells with ECP10MDF-ECP78MDF; no spin-orbit operator is included, which may affect Fr- and Ra-containing species.
  • domain assumption Neutral-molecule well depths D_e(AB) from Ref. [96] used in the E_EA formula are accurate.
    Equation in Section III D uses D_e(AB) from the authors' prior paper; the ground-state PECs of this work do not depend on it.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Diatomic molecular anions of alkali-metal and alkaline-earth-metal atoms." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3PBQNIQC

@misc{pith2026260805067,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Diatomic molecular anions of alkali-metal and alkaline-earth-metal atoms},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3PBQNIQC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.05067}
}
abstract

Studies of anions are inherently more challenging than investigations of neutrals and cations because of the diffuse and weakly bound character of an anionic electron. Here, we present a comprehensive computational examination of ground-state diatomic molecular anions composed of alkali-metal (Li, Na, K, Rb, Cs, Fr) and alkaline-earth-metal (Be, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Ra) atoms. We study 21 alkali-metal diatomic anions in the X$^{2}\Sigma^{+}$ electronic state and 36 alkali-metal--alkaline-earth-metal diatomic anions in the X$^{1}\Sigma^{+}$ electronic state. The calculations employ a hierarchy of the coupled cluster methods, combined with large Gaussian basis sets and small-core relativistic energy-consistent pseudopotentials for heavier elements. We compute potential energy curves, permanent electric dipole moments, and static polarizabilities, and we assess convergence and uncertainties of our results. Additionally, using the multireference configuration interaction and equation-of-motion electron-attachment coupled cluster methods, we investigate excited electronic states of alkali-metal molecular anions, including valence-bound and dipole-bound states. We predict crossings between ground neutral and excited anionic states, which may enhance resonant electron attachment and subsequent anion dissociation. This finding may be relevant for experiments with mixtures of ultracold ground-state alkali-metal molecules and Rydberg atoms.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.05067 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Potential energy curves for the lowest X [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Cross sections of selected Hartree–Fock molecular orbitals [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Electron binding energies of the dipole-bound states of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Potential energy curves of alkali-metal diatomic molecular anions in the ground X [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Potential energy curves of all the alkali-metal–alkaline-earth-metal diatomic molecular anions in the ground X [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Potential energy curves of the (a) KRb [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Permanent electric dipole moments for selected diatomic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

149 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The EOM-EA-CCSD calculations are carried out using the CFOUR package [111], while the CCSDT energies are obtained with the MRCC program [112] interfaced with MOLPRO

    Thezaxis is oriented from the atom with a larger ionization potential to the atom with a smaller ionization potential, and the origin is at the center of mass. The EOM-EA-CCSD calculations are carried out using the CFOUR package [111], while the CCSDT energies are obtained with the MRCC program [112] interfaced with MOLPRO. All remaining electronic struct...

    1988

  2. [2]

    Alkali-metal diatomic anions The alkali-metal diatomic molecular anions in their X 2Σ+ electronic ground states are relatively strongly bound. Av- eraged over all 21 alkali-metal diatomic anions, the calcu- lated well depth is4389 cm −1, approximately500 cm −1 larger than the average value of3892 cm −1 for the corre- sponding neutral molecules [96]. The w...

    1909

  3. [3]

    Alkali-metal–alkaline-earth-metal diatomic anions The alkali-metal–alkaline-earth-metal molecular anions in their X 1Σ+ electronic ground states are, on average, less strongly bound than the alkali-metal diatomic anions. Aver- aged over all 36 molecular anions, the calculated well depth is 2869 cm −1, which is more than twice the average value of 1311 cm ...

  4. [4]

    J. L. Bohn, A. M. Rey, and J. Ye, Science357, 1002 (2017)

    2017

  5. [5]

    Karman, M

    T. Karman, M. Tomza, and J. P ´erez-R´ıos, Nat. Phys.20, 722 (2024)

    2024

  6. [6]

    DeMille, J

    D. DeMille, J. M. Doyle, and A. O. Sushkov, Science357, 990 (2017)

    2017

  7. [7]

    DeMille, N

    D. DeMille, N. R. Hutzler, A. M. Rey, and T. Zelevinsky, Nat. Phys.20, 741 (2024)

    2024

  8. [8]

    Gross and I

    C. Gross and I. Bloch, Science357, 995 (2017). 16

    2017

Show all 149 references
  1. [9]

    S. L. Cornish, M. R. Tarbutt, and K. R. A. Hazzard, Nat. Phys. 20, 730 (2024)

    2024

  2. [10]

    Tomza, K

    M. Tomza, K. Jachymski, R. Gerritsma, A. Negretti, T. Calarco, Z. Idziaszek, and P. S. Julienne, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 035001 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    M. Deiß, S. Willitsch, and J. Hecker Denschlag, Nat. Phys. 20, 713 (2024)

    2024

  4. [12]

    Eschner, G

    J. Eschner, G. Morigi, F. Schmidt-Kaler, and R. Blatt, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B20, 1003 (2003)

    2003

  5. [13]

    A. T. Grier, M. Cetina, F. Oruˇcevi´c, and V . Vuleti´c, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 223201 (2009)

    2009

  6. [14]

    Zipkes, S

    C. Zipkes, S. Palzer, C. Sias, and M. K ¨ohl, Nature464, 388 (2010)

    2010

  7. [15]

    Schmid, A

    S. Schmid, A. H ¨arter, and J. Hecker Denschlag, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 133202 (2010)

    2010

  8. [16]

    Schmidt, P

    J. Schmidt, P. Weckesser, F. Thielemann, T. Schaetz, and L. Karpa, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 053402 (2020)

    2020

  9. [17]

    F. H. J. Hall, M. Aymar, N. Bouloufa-Maafa, O. Dulieu, and S. Willitsch, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 243202 (2011)

    2011

  10. [18]

    S. Haze, S. Hata, M. Fujinaga, and T. Mukaiyama, Phys. Rev. A87, 052715 (2013)

    2013

  11. [19]

    Smith, D

    W. Smith, D. Goodman, I. Sivarajah, J. Wells, S. Banerjee, R. Cˆot´e, H. Michels, J. Mongtomery, and F. Narducci, Appl. Phys. B114, 75 (2014)

    2014

  12. [20]

    Z. Meir, T. Sikorsky, R. Ben-Shlomi, N. Akerman, Y . Dallal, and R. Ozeri, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 243401 (2016)

    2016

  13. [21]

    Dutta, R

    S. Dutta, R. Sawant, and S. A. Rangwala, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 113401 (2017)

    2017

  14. [22]

    Joger, H

    J. Joger, H. F ¨urst, N. Ewald, T. Feldker, M. Tomza, and R. Gerritsma, Phys. Rev. A96, 030703 (2017)

    2017

  15. [23]

    Weckesser, F

    P. Weckesser, F. Thielemann, D. Wiater, A. Wojciechowska, L. Karpa, K. Jachymski, M. Tomza, T. Walker, and T. Schaetz, Nature600, 429 (2021)

    2021

  16. [24]

    F. H. Hall, M. Aymar, M. Raoult, O. Dulieu, and S. Willitsch, Mol. Phys.111, 1683 (2013)

    2013

  17. [25]

    Sikorsky, Z

    T. Sikorsky, Z. Meir, R. Ben-Shlomi, N. Akerman, and R. Oz- eri, Nat. Commun.9, 920 (2018)

    2018

  18. [26]

    Feldker, H

    T. Feldker, H. F ¨urst, H. Hirzler, N. Ewald, M. Mazzanti, D. Wiater, M. Tomza, and R. Gerritsma, Nat. Phys.16, 413 (2020)

    2020

  19. [27]

    ´Smiałkowski and M

    M. ´Smiałkowski and M. Tomza, Phys. Rev. A101, 012501 (2020)

    2020

  20. [28]

    da Silva Jr, M

    H. da Silva Jr, M. Raoult, M. Aymar, and O. Dulieu, New J. Phys.17, 045015 (2015)

    2015

  21. [29]

    Zrafi, H

    W. Zrafi, H. Ladjimi, H. Said, H. Berriche, and M. Tomza, New J. Phys.22, 073015 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    Idziaszek, T

    Z. Idziaszek, T. Calarco, P. S. Julienne, and A. Simoni, Phys. Rev. A79, 010702 (2009)

    2009

  23. [31]

    Tomza, C

    M. Tomza, C. P. Koch, and R. Moszynski, Phys. Rev. A91, 042706 (2015)

    2015

  24. [32]

    Mølhave and M

    K. Mølhave and M. Drewsen, Phys. Rev. A62, 011401 (2000)

    2000

  25. [33]

    A. K. Hansen, M. A. Sørensen, P. F. Staanum, and M. Drewsen, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed.51, 7960 (2012)

    2012

  26. [34]

    Patel, D

    S. Patel, D. Sardar, J. Saraladevi, M. Tomza, and K. R. Brown, J. Phys. Chem. Lett.17, 6574 (2026)

    2026

  27. [35]

    S. T. Sullivan, W. G. Rellergert, S. Kotochigova, K. Chen, S. J. Schowalter, and E. R. Hudson, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.13, 18859 (2011)

    2011

  28. [36]

    Jyothi, T

    S. Jyothi, T. Ray, S. Dutta, A. R. Allouche, R. Vexiau, O. Dulieu, and S. A. Rangwala, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 213002 (2016)

    2016

  29. [37]

    W. G. Rellergert, S. T. Sullivan, S. J. Schowalter, S. Ko- tochigova, K. Chen, and E. R. Hudson, Nature495, 490 (2013)

    2013

  30. [38]

    A. K. Hansen, O. Versolato, Ł. Kłosowski, S. Kristensen, A. Gingell, M. Schwarz, A. Windberger, J. Ullrich, J. C. L´opez-Urrutia, and M. Drewsen, Nature508, 76 (2014)

    2014

  31. [39]

    Simons, J

    J. Simons, J. Phys. Chem. A112, 6401 (2008)

    2008

  32. [40]

    Simons, J

    J. Simons, J. Phys. Chem. A127, 3940 (2023)

    2023

  33. [41]

    Simons, Annu

    J. Simons, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem.62, 107 (2011)

    2011

  34. [42]

    Kellerbauer and J

    A. Kellerbauer and J. Walz, New J. Phys.8, 45 (2006)

    2006

  35. [43]

    Cerchiari, A

    G. Cerchiari, A. Kellerbauer, M. S. Safronova, U. I. Safronova, and P. Yzombard, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 133205 (2018)

    2018

  36. [44]

    D. J. Pegg, Rep. Prog. Phys.67, 857 (2004)

    2004

  37. [45]

    R. C. Bilodeau and H. K. Haugen, Phys. Rev. Lett.85, 534 (2000)

    2000

  38. [46]

    C. W. Walter, N. D. Gibson, C. M. Janczak, K. A. Starr, A. P. Snedden, R. L. Field III, and P. Andersson, Phys. Rev. A76, 052702 (2007)

    2007

  39. [47]

    S. M. O’Malley and D. R. Beck, Phys. Rev. A81, 032503 (2010)

    2010

  40. [48]

    C. W. Walter, N. D. Gibson, D. J. Matyas, C. Crocker, K. A. Dungan, B. R. Matola, and J. Rohl ´en, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 063001 (2014)

    2014

  41. [49]

    R. Tang, R. Si, Z. Fei, X. Fu, Y . Lu, T. Brage, H. Liu, C. Chen, and C. Ning, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 203002 (2019)

    2019

  42. [50]

    Yzombard, M

    P. Yzombard, M. Hamamda, S. Gerber, M. Doser, and D. Comparat, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 213001 (2015)

    2015

  43. [51]

    N ¨otzold, R

    M. N ¨otzold, R. Wild, C. Lochmann, and R. Wester, Phys. Rev. A106, 023111 (2022)

    2022

  44. [52]

    J. C. Rienstra-Kiracofe, G. S. Tschumper, H. F. Schaefer, S. Nandi, and G. B. Ellison, Chem. Rev.102, 231 (2002)

    2002

  45. [53]

    Desfranc ¸ois, H

    C. Desfranc ¸ois, H. Abdoul-Carime, and J.-P. Schermann, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B10, 1339 (1996)

    1996

  46. [54]

    K. D. Jordan and F. Wang, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem.54, 367 (2003)

    2003

  47. [55]

    Y . Lu, R. Tang, and C. Ning, J. Phys. Chem. Lett.12, 5897 (2021)

    2021

  48. [56]

    Tauch, S

    J. Tauch, S. Z. Hassan, M. N ¨otzold, E. S. Endres, R. Wester, and M. Weidem¨uller, Nat. Phys.19, 1270 (2023)

    2023

  49. [57]

    Hauser, S

    D. Hauser, S. Lee, F. Carelli, S. Spieler, O. Lakhmanskaya, E. S. Endres, S. S. Kumar, F. Gianturco, and R. Wester, Nat. Phys.11, 467 (2015)

    2015

  50. [58]

    Deiglmayr, A

    J. Deiglmayr, A. G ¨oritz, T. Best, M. Weidem ¨uller, and R. Wester, Phys. Rev. A86, 043438 (2012)

    2012

  51. [59]

    S. Z. Hassan, J. Tauch, M. Kas, M. N ¨otzold, H. L. Carrera, E. S. Endres, R. Wester, and M. Weidem ¨uller, Nat. Commun. 13, 818 (2022)

    2022

  52. [60]

    S. Z. Hassan, J. Tauch, M. Kas, M. N ¨otzold, R. Wester, and M. Weidem¨uller, J. Chem. Phys.156, 094304 (2022)

    2022

  53. [61]

    Gonz ´alez-S´anchez, F

    L. Gonz ´alez-S´anchez, F. Carelli, F. Gianturco, and R. Wester, Chem. Phys.462, 111 (2015)

    2015

  54. [62]

    M. Kas, J. Loreau, J. Li ´evin, and N. Vaeck, J. Chem. Phys. 146, 194309 (2017)

    2017

  55. [63]

    Tomza, Phys

    M. Tomza, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.19, 16512 (2017)

    2017

  56. [64]

    M. Kas, J. Loreau, J. Li ´evin, and N. Vaeck, Phys. Rev. A99, 042702 (2019)

    2019

  57. [65]

    J. N. Byrd, H. H. Michels, J. A. Montgomery Jr, and R. C ˆot´e, Phys. Rev. A88, 032710 (2013)

    2013

  58. [66]

    Guttridge, D

    A. Guttridge, D. K. Ruttley, A. C. Baldock, R. Gonz ´alez- F´erez, H. R. Sadeghpour, C. S. Adams, and S. L. Cornish, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 013401 (2023)

    2023

  59. [67]

    L. Zhu, J. Luke, R. Shaham, Y .-X. Liu, and K.-K. Ni, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 153001 (2025)

    2025

  60. [68]

    Patsch, M

    S. Patsch, M. Zeppenfeld, and C. P. Koch, J. Phys. Chem. Lett.13, 10728 (2022)

    2022

  61. [69]

    J. Zou, R. R. W. Wang, R. Gonz´alez-F´erez, H. R. Sadeghpour, and S. D. Hogan, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 113402 (2026). 17

    2026

  62. [70]

    S. D. Huber and H. P. B ¨uchler, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 193006 (2012)

    2012

  63. [71]

    B. Zhao, A. W. Glaetzle, G. Pupillo, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 193007 (2012)

    2012

  64. [72]

    Zhang, S

    C. Zhang, S. T. Rittenhouse, T. V . Tscherbul, H. R. Sadegh- pour, and N. R. Hutzler, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 033001 (2024)

    2024

  65. [73]

    Zhang and M

    C. Zhang and M. Tarbutt, PRX Quantum3, 030340 (2022)

    2022

  66. [74]

    K. Wang, C. P. Williams, L. R. Picard, N. Y . Yao, and K.-K. Ni, PRX Quantum3, 030339 (2022)

    2022

  67. [75]

    Y .-H. Bai, Y . Wei, C. Zhang, W. Li, and X.-Q. Shao, arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.29349 (2026)

    2026

  68. [76]

    Zhang, S

    C. Zhang, S. Murciano, N. Tantivasadakarn, and R. Finkel- stein, arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.12909 (2026)

    2026

  69. [77]

    Dobrzyniecki and M

    J. Dobrzyniecki and M. Tomza, Phys. Rev. A108, 052618 (2023)

    2023

  70. [78]

    Sarkas, S

    H. Sarkas, S. Arnold, J. Hendricks, V . Slager, and K. Bowen, Zeitschrift f¨ur Phys. D At. Mol. Clust.29, 209 (1994)

    1994

  71. [79]

    McHugh, J

    K. McHugh, J. Eaton, G. Lee, H. Sarkas, L. Kidder, J. Snod- grass, M. Manaa, and K. Bowen, J. Chem. Phys.91, 3792 (1989)

    1989

  72. [80]

    Eaton, H

    J. Eaton, H. Sarkas, S. Arnold, K. McHugh, and K. Bowen, Chem. Phys. Lett.193, 141 (1992)

    1992

  73. [81]

    Andersen and J

    E. Andersen and J. Simons, J. Chem. Phys.64, 4548 (1976)

    1976

  74. [82]

    D. A. Dixon, J. L. Gole, and K. D. Jordan, J. Chem. Phys.66, 567 (1977)

    1977

  75. [83]

    Shepard, K

    R. Shepard, K. D. Jordan, and J. Simons, J. Chem. Phys.69, 1788 (1978)

    1978

  76. [84]

    Sunil and K

    K. Sunil and K. Jordan, Chem. Phys. Lett.104, 343 (1984)

    1984

  77. [85]

    D. D. Konowalow and J. L. Fish, Chem. Phys. Lett.104, 210 (1984)

    1984

  78. [86]

    Michels, R

    H. Michels, R. Hobbs, and L. Wright, Chem. Phys. Lett.118, 67 (1985)

    1985

  79. [87]

    A. I. Boldyrev, J. Simons, and P. v. R. Schleyer, J. Chem. Phys.99, 8793 (1993)

    1993

  80. [88]

    Petch, D

    B. Petch, D. L. Cooper, J. Gerratt, P. B. Karadakov, and M. Raimondi, J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans.91, 3751 (1995)

    1995

  81. [89]

    Hogreve, Eur

    H. Hogreve, Eur. Phys. J. D8, 85 (2000)

    2000

  82. [90]

    Nasiri and M

    S. Nasiri and M. Zahedi, Comput. Theor. Chem.1114, 106 (2017)

    2017

  83. [91]

    T. H. Dunning Jr and L. T. Xu, J. Comput. Chem.45, 405 (2024)

    2024

  84. [92]

    Partridge, D

    H. Partridge, D. A. Dixon, S. P. Walch, C. W. Bauschlicher Jr., and J. L. Gole, J. Chem. Phys.79, 1859 (1983)

    1983

  85. [93]

    Krauss and W

    M. Krauss and W. Stevens, J. Chem. Phys.93, 4236 (1990)

    1990

  86. [94]

    C. W. Bauschlicher Jr., S. R. Langhoff, and H. Partridge, J. Chem. Phys.96, 1240 (1992)

    1992

  87. [95]

    Moussa, N

    A. Moussa, N. El-Kork, and M. Korek, New J. Phys.23, 013017 (2021)

    2021

  88. [96]

    Gronowski, A

    M. Gronowski, A. M. Koza, and M. Tomza, Phys. Rev. A102, 020801 (2020)

    2020

  89. [97]

    Karman, M

    T. Karman, M. Gronowski, M. Tomza, J. J. Park, H. Son, Y .-K. Lu, A. O. Jamison, and W. Ketterle, Phys. Rev. A108, 023309 (2023)

    2023

  90. [98]

    Ladjimi and M

    H. Ladjimi and M. Tomza, Phys. Rev. A108, L021302 (2023)

    2023

  91. [99]

    Ladjimi and M

    H. Ladjimi and M. Tomza, Phys. Rev. A109, 052814 (2024)

    2024

  92. [100]

    R. J. Bartlett and M. Musiał, Rev. Mod. Phys.79, 291 (2007)

    2007

  93. [101]

    B. P. Prascher, D. E. Woon, K. A. Peterson, T. H. Dunning, and A. K. Wilson, Theor. Chem. Acc.128, 69 (2011)

    2011

  94. [102]

    J. G. Hill and K. A. Peterson, J. Chem. Phys.147, 244106 (2017)

    2017

  95. [103]

    (s: 0.6, 0.2, 0.067, 0.02,p: 0.6, 0.2, 0.067, 0.02,d: 0.4, 0.13, 0.04,f: 0.4, 0.13, 0.04,g: 0.2)

  96. [104]

    Tao and Y .-K

    F.-M. Tao and Y .-K. Pan, J. Chem. Phys.97, 4989 (1992)

    1992

  97. [105]

    S. F. Boys and F. Bernardi, Mol. Phys.19, 553 (1970)

    1970

  98. [106]

    Dolg and X

    M. Dolg and X. Cao, Chem. Rev.112, 403 (2012)

    2012

  99. [107]

    I. S. Lim, P. Schwerdtfeger, T. S¨ohnel, and H. Stoll, J. Chem. Phys.122, 034107 (2005)

    2005

  100. [108]

    I. S. Lim, H. Stoll, and P. Schwerdtfeger, J. Chem. Phys.124, 034107 (2006)

    2006

  101. [109]

    Helgaker, W

    T. Helgaker, W. Klopper, H. Koch, and J. Noga, J. Chem. Phys.106, 9639 (1997)

    1997

  102. [110]

    Helgaker, P

    T. Helgaker, P. Jorgensen, and J. Olsen, eds.,Molecular Electronic-Structure Theory(Wiley, 2000)

    2000

  103. [111]

    Nooijen and R

    M. Nooijen and R. J. Bartlett, J. Chem. Phys.102, 3629 (1995)

    1995

  104. [112]

    Kaufmann, W

    K. Kaufmann, W. Baumeister, and M. Jungen, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.22, 2223 (1989)

    1989

  105. [113]

    See Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by pub- lisher] for the calculated potential energy curves, developed basis sets, and electron binding energies of the dipole-bound states in a numerical form, as well as the spectroscopic param- eters at the CCSD(T) level

  106. [114]

    D. A. Matthews, L. Cheng, M. E. Harding, F. Lipparini, S. Stopkowicz, T.-C. Jagau, P. G. Szalay, J. Gauss, and J. F. Stanton, J. Chem. Phys.152, 041601 (2020)

    2020

  107. [115]

    K ´allay, P

    M. K ´allay, P. R. Nagy, D. Mester, Z. Rolik, G. Samu, J. Cson- tos, J. Cs´oka, P. B. Szab´o, L. Gyevi-Nagy, B. H´egely,et al., J. Chem. Phys.152, 074107 (2020)

    2020

  108. [116]

    Molpro, version 2019.2, a package of ab initio programs,

    H.-J. Werner, P. J. Knowles,et al., “Molpro, version 2019.2, a package of ab initio programs,” See https://www.molpro.net

    2019

  109. [117]

    Werner, P

    H.-J. Werner, P. J. Knowles, G. Knizia, F. R. Manby, and M. Sch¨utz, WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci.2, 242 (2012)

    2012

  110. [118]

    Kramida, Yu

    A. Kramida, Yu. Ralchenko, J. Reader, and NIST ASD Team, NIST Atomic Spectra Database (ver. 5.12), [Online]. Avail- able:physics.nist.gov/asd[2022, January 31]. Na- tional Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD. (2022)

    2022

  111. [119]

    Haeffler, D

    G. Haeffler, D. Hanstorp, I. Kiyan, A. E. Klinkm ¨uller, U. Ljungblad, and D. J. Pegg, Phys. Rev. A53, 4127 (1996)

    1996

  112. [120]

    Miffre, M

    A. Miffre, M. Jacquey, M. B ¨uchner, G. Tr´enec, and J. Vigu ´e, Eur. Phys. J. D38, 353 (2006)

    2006

  113. [121]

    A. S. McNeill, K. A. Peterson, and D. A. Dixon, J. Chem. Phys.153, 174304 (2020)

    2020

  114. [122]

    Sahoo, Phys

    B. Sahoo, Phys. Rev. A102, 022820 (2020)

    2020

  115. [123]

    Andersen, H

    T. Andersen, H. Haugen, and H. Hotop, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data28, 1511 (1999)

    1999

  116. [124]

    C. R. Ekstrom, J. Schmiedmayer, M. S. Chapman, T. D. Ham- mond, and D. E. Pritchard, Phys. Rev. A51, 3883 (1995)

    1995

  117. [125]

    K. T. Andersson, J. Sandstr ¨om, I. Y . Kiyan, D. Hanstorp, and D. J. Pegg, Phys. Rev. A62, 022503 (2000)

    2000

  118. [126]

    M. D. Gregoire, I. Hromada, W. F. Holmgren, R. Trubko, and A. D. Cronin, Phys. Rev. A92, 052513 (2015)

    2015

  119. [127]

    P. Frey, F. Breyer, and H. Holop, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys. 11, L589 (1978)

    1978

  120. [128]

    Landau, E

    A. Landau, E. Eliav, Y . Ishikawa, and U. Kaldor, J. Chem. Phys.115, 2389 (2001)

    2001

  121. [129]

    Derevianko, W

    A. Derevianko, W. Johnson, M. Safronova, and J. Babb, Phys. Rev. Lett.82, 3589 (1999)

    1999

  122. [130]

    Mitroy and M

    J. Mitroy and M. W. Bromley, Phys. Rev. A68, 052714 (2003)

    2003

  123. [131]

    Jiang, J

    J. Jiang, J. Mitroy, Y . Cheng, and M. Bromley, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables101, 158 (2015)

    2015

  124. [132]

    Porsev and A

    S. Porsev and A. Derevianko, J. Exp. Theor. Phys.102, 195 (2006)

    2006

  125. [133]

    Petrunin, H

    V . Petrunin, H. Andersen, P. Balling, and T. Andersen, Phys. Rev. Lett.76, 744 (1996)

    1996

  126. [134]

    Andersen, V

    H. Andersen, V . Petrunin, P. Kristensen, and T. Andersen, Phys. Rev. A55, 3247 (1997)

    1997

  127. [135]

    Petrunin, J

    V . Petrunin, J. V oldstad, P. Balling, P. Kristensen, T. Andersen, 18 and H. Haugen, Phys. Rev. Lett.75, 1911 (1995)

    1995

  128. [136]

    Andersen, Phys

    T. Andersen, Phys. Rep.394, 157 (2004)

    2004

  129. [137]

    I. S. Lim and P. Schwerdtfeger, Phys. Rev. A70, 062501 (2004)

    2004

  130. [138]

    Fox and J

    K. Fox and J. E. Turner, J. Chem. Phys.45, 1142 (1966)

    1966

  131. [139]

    L ´evy-Leblond, Phys

    J.-M. L ´evy-Leblond, Phys. Rev.153, 1 (1967)

    1967

  132. [140]

    W. B. Brown and R. E. Roberts, J. Chem. Phys.46, 2006 (1967)

    1967

  133. [141]

    S. Ard, W. Garrett, R. Compton, L. Adamowicz, and S. Stepa- nian, Chem. Phys. Lett.473, 223 (2009)

    2009

  134. [142]

    O. H. Crawford and W. R. Garrett, J. Chem. Phys.66, 4968 (1977)

    1977

  135. [143]

    Garrett, Chem

    W. Garrett, Chem. Phys. Lett.5, 393 (1970)

    1970

  136. [144]

    W. R. Garrett, Phys. Rev. A3, 961 (1971)

    1971

  137. [145]

    Qian, G.-Z

    C.-H. Qian, G.-Z. Zhu, and L.-S. Wang, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 10, 6472 (2019)

    2019

  138. [146]

    I. S. Ulusoy and A. K. Wilson, inMath. Phys. Theor . Chem., Developments in Physical & Theoretical Chemistry, edited by S. Blinder and J. House (Elsevier, 2019) p. 31

    2019

  139. [147]

    Tao, Int

    F.-M. Tao, Int. Rev. Phys. Chem.20, 617 (2001)

    2001

  140. [148]

    Quemener and P

    G. Quemener and P. S. Julienne, Chem. Rev.112, 4949 (2012)

    2012

  141. [149]

    Lemeshko, R

    M. Lemeshko, R. V . Krems, J. M. Doyle, and S. Kais, Mol. Phys.111, 1648 (2013)

    2013

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.