Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 60 references

Post-collision interaction in the liquid phase: the role of electron scattering

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Electron-transport Monte-Carlo simulations reproduce post-collision interaction in liquid water better than the damped analytical theory.

desk verdict A solid, honest experimental study of PCI in liquids with a promising but explicitly conditional Monte-Carlo approach; the central claim survives if you accept the stated screening assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.18734 v2 pith:IEWCS2XL submitted 2025-07-24 physics.chem-ph physics.atom-ph

Rémi Dupuy , Francis Penent , Bastien Lutet-Toti , Vincent Duval , Jérome Palaudoux , Denis Céolin This is my paper
classification physics.chem-phphysics.atom-ph
keywords post-collisioninteractionAugerelectronspectroscopyliquidmicrojetscatteringMonte-Carlosimulationaqueoussolutionsdielectricscreeninglow-energytransport
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

Post-collision interaction (PCI)—the energy exchange when a slow photoelectron is overtaken by a fast Auger electron—shows up clearly in the KLL Auger spectra of solvated Cl−, K+ and Ca2+. The measured shifts are similar across the three ions and barely change when the solvent goes from water to methanol or ethanol; after the much broader liquid-phase peaks are accounted for, they sit close to gas-phase free-atom predictions. That near-equality is the paper's clue that two condensed-media effects, dielectric screening and electron scattering, roughly cancel. The central methodological claim is that scattering is better described by stochastic electron-transport Monte-Carlo simulations than by an earlier analytical modification that folds scattering into an effective damping term. Two of the four simulation treatments give fair agreement with the Cl− data, and the damping model's lineshapes are clearly too broad; the authors propose PCI data as a new constraint on low-energy electron scattering cross-sections in water.

What carries the argument

The central object is the time-dependent energy exchange S(t), which in the condensed phase is written as S(t) = 1/(ε r(t)), the inverse product of the optical dielectric constant and the radius at which the Auger electron overtakes the photoelectron. In the free-atom theory S(t) = C/(vph t) enters the eikonal overlap integral of equation 1 and produces the asymmetric Lorentzian-times-exponential lineshape of equation 4. The paper replaces the analytic rectilinear trajectory by an ensemble of Monte-Carlo photoelectron trajectories in which elastic scattering deflects and inelastic scattering slows the electron according to two alternative cross-section sets, so that S(t) becomes a statistical average over scattering histories rather than the result of a damping parameter; the final spectrum is then evaluated either classically or by inserting the simulated S(t) into the semiclassical integral.

What would settle it

Measure PCI shifts and lineshapes for Cl− in two solvents chosen to have the same optical refractive index but very different low-energy electron scattering cross-sections (for instance water and a fluorinated alcohol matched to n ≈ 1.33); the Monte-Carlo model predicts different shifts because scattering differs, whereas a screening-only description predicts identical shifts.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper argues that PCI in bulk liquid water is governed by two competing mechanisms: Coulomb screening, which reduces the exchanged energy by the optical dielectric constant (taken as ε = 1.8), and electron scattering, which slows and deflects the photoelectron and thus increases the exchange. For aqueous Cl−, K+ and Ca2+, the PCI shifts are close to free-atom values once the much larger liquid-phase broadening is included, implying that scattering and screening happen to compensate. The strengthened claim is that the previously proposed analytical modification—substituting an effective damping Γeff = Γ + ħvph/λ into the semiclassical formula—overestimates the PCI shift and produces excessively broad lineshapes, while computing the photoelectron's stochastic motion with Monte-Carlo electron transport and feeding the simulated energy-exchange histories into either a classical histogram or the semiclassical integral gives fair agreement with the Cl− experiment. Because two cross-section parameter sets (ice-based and model-based) bracket the data, the paper cautions that the agreement does not yet validate either the scattering parameters or the classical-versus-semiclassical choice.

Load-bearing premise

The whole comparison rests on treating femtosecond-scale Coulomb screening as a simple division by the optical dielectric constant (ε ≈ 1.8); if screening at the nanometer distances where the electrons cross is not captured by that single number, the inferred scattering contribution—and the Monte-Carlo conclusion—would change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Liquid-phase PCI shifts cannot be compared with gas-phase values without first broadening the predicted lineshape by the liquid's configurational width; once that is done, the apparent enhancement of PCI in water mostly disappears.
  • The effective-damping modification of free-atom PCI theory fails as a description of bulk dielectric media because its predicted lineshapes are far too broad, even where its shift values seem plausible.
  • PCI lineshapes of aqueous Cl− contain information beyond the peak shift and can discriminate between electron-transport parameter sets that give similar shifts.
  • PCI measurements on solvated ions are a viable addition to the set of experiments used to constrain integral and differential electron scattering cross-sections of liquid water.
  • The near-cancellation of screening and scattering is specific to this dielectric regime, not a general rule, so condensed-phase PCI parameters are not transferable from the gas phase or between different classes of materials.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If PCI lineshapes are as sensitive to differential cross-sections as this comparison suggests, KLL Auger spectra of solvated ions just above threshold could probe angular and energy-loss scattering parameters that integral cross-section measurements cannot isolate.
  • The same simulation machinery could be applied to photoelectron lines or to non-aqueous solvents with different optical constants, where the screening-scattering balance—and hence the predicted shift—would shift in a testable way.
  • The flattening of the PCI shift below about 10 eV, which the paper treats only qualitatively, offers a sharp future test: a transport model with validated low-energy cross-sections should reproduce that break, and failure would point to the cross-sections rather than to the PCI description.
  • One could invert the exercise and use solvated ions with known short core-hole lifetimes as a femtosecond clock to rank competing scattering parameter sets, effectively turning PCI data into a benchmark for electron-transport models.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports a systematic study of post-collision interaction (PCI) in liquid-phase KLL Auger spectra of aqueous Cl-, K+ and Ca2+ and of Cl- in methanol and ethanol. The experiments are compared with a previously proposed analytical modification of semiclassical PCI theory (screening by a dielectric constant plus an effective damping term, Eq. 6) and with Monte Carlo electron-transport simulations in which the PCI energy exchange S(t) is evaluated from simulated trajectories and post-processed either classically or through the semiclassical integral of Eq. (1). The central claim is that the Monte Carlo treatment of electron scattering gives better agreement with experiment than the analytical theory, and that PCI data could constrain low-energy electron scattering cross-sections in water. The measured PCI shifts for the three ions are similar to each other and, once condensed-phase broadening is included, close to free-atom predictions, implying approximate compensation of screening and scattering.

Significance. If the screening model is correct, this is a useful contribution: it provides a new experimental observable sensitive to electron scattering in the liquid phase, compares two scattering parameter sets head-to-head, and is candid about the remaining uncertainties. The paper ships open data (Zenodo DOI), documents the Monte Carlo model in generous detail, and explicitly acknowledges instabilities in some datasets and the ambiguity between classical and semiclassical PCI post-processing. These strengths make the manuscript worth serious consideration. The significance is, however, tempered by the fact that the central inference is conditional on a scalar optical dielectric constant of 1.8 and on a specific pairing of cross-section set and PCI computation method; the paper itself states that experiment alone cannot decide between those pairings.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. IV.A and Appendix A] The inference that Monte Carlo transport 'improves agreement' is not separated from the assumed screening model. The whole analysis uses S(t)=1/(\epsilon r(t)) with a single optical dielectric constant \epsilon=1.8, and Appendix B shows that screening and scattering nearly cancel for the successful model CS/semiclassical combination. Under these conditions the inferred scattering contribution is directly proportional to the adopted screening factor: if the effective \epsilon at the femtosecond/nanometer PCI scale is outside the plausible 1.6-2.0 range, or is nonlocal, the amount of scattering needed to match the data changes, and the MC-versus-analytical comparison may no longer hold. The authors acknowledge this in Sec. IV.A, but the abstract and conclusion state the result more strongly than the evidence supports. Please add a quantitative sensitivity analysis over the plausible \epsilon range, or explicitly reformulate the central claim as conditional on \epsilon=1.8.
  2. [Sec. III.B, Fig. 4, and Sec. IV.A] The central comparison is degenerate with respect to the choices in the simulation pipeline. Fig. 4 shows that ice-CS/classical and model-CS/semiclassical agree fairly with experiment, while ice-CS/semiclassical and model-CS/classical do not; the two cross-section sets differ by roughly a factor of five (Fig. 6). Because the authors state that experiment cannot decide between the classical and semiclassical post-processing approaches, the claim that the MC approach is better than the analytical theory is established only for selected pairings, not for the Monte Carlo transport method as such. Please present a combined uncertainty band spanning the cross-section and post-processing choices and compare that band with the modified analytical theory; otherwise the abstract's wording overstates what is demonstrated.
  3. [Sec. III.B, Fig. 4] The high-kinetic-energy behavior is in tension with the overall-agreement claim. At eKE \approx 475 eV the experimental PCI shift is consistent with zero within the error bars, while all theoretical variants predict shifts of order 0.1 eV. This is not a low-energy regime where cross-section uncertainties can be invoked; it is a regime the models should handle. The authors note the discrepancy in passing, but it should be analyzed more seriously (e.g., as an unidentified systematic in the peak-maximum determination, a background issue, or missing physics such as additional inelastic channels) before the Monte Carlo approach can be said to provide a generally better description.
  4. [Sec. III.B] The quantitative comparison uses only the Cl- ion, whose main peak has an asymmetric low-KE shoulder attributed to an unidentified satellite. All theoretical and simulated spectra are convolved with a two-Gaussian shape whose parameters (main FWHM 1.27 eV, satellite shift -0.95 eV, satellite FWHM 3.13 eV, amplitude ratio 0.58) are fitted to the PCI-free spectrum well above threshold. If the satellite component responds to PCI differently from the main peak, both the shift and lineshape comparisons will be biased. Because this is the only ion used for quantitative theory comparison, the assumption stated in Sec. III.A should be tested, for example by refitting the two-Gaussian parameters to near-threshold spectra or by propagating their uncertainties into the theoretical curves.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] The sentence 'The two main factors modifying the PCI interaction in condensed media is the screening...' has a subject-verb disagreement; it should be 'are the screening...'.
  2. [Fig. 4 caption] The legend lists 'MC, model CS, semiclassical' twice; the last entry should presumably read 'MC, model CS, classical'.
  3. [Sec. III.A] In the description of the K+ spectrum, 'main1D peak' should be 'main 1D peak' for readability.
  4. [Fig. 6 caption] The phrase 'One can readily observed' should be 'One can readily observe'.
  5. [Appendix A] Equation (A3) uses the logistic sigmoid \Theta for the high-energy cutoff; the sentence 'The second Theta function is a cut-off at high energy' is clearer as 'The second \Theta factor provides a high-energy cutoff'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the theoretical predictions are not fitted to the target PCI shifts and the cited references are used as external baselines or independent inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that Monte-Carlo electron-transport simulations yield better agreement with liquid-phase PCI measurements than a modified analytical theory, with screening and scattering treated as the two relevant condensed-phase effects. The comparison is self-contained in the sense that the theoretical inputs are not tuned to the PCI shift data being predicted. The optical dielectric constant (epsilon = 1.8) is taken from known water optics, the scattering cross-sections come from prior published sources (Michaud-Sanche ice data and gas-phase-based models), and the core-hole lifetime is the atomic value. The peak-shape deconvolution parameters are fitted to PCI-free spectra measured far above threshold, which is an independent reference, and are then used to convolve theoretical lineshapes; this is a standard broadening correction, not a fit to the predicted PCI shift. The modified analytical theory of Velasquez et al. (ref. 16) is explicitly presented as a baseline with acknowledged shortcomings, and although one author of the present paper also appears on that reference, the comparison does not rely on that citation for its logical force: the theory is quoted and mathematically displayed, and the paper argues against it. The conclusion that screening and scattering roughly compensate is inferred from comparing independent calculations and measured shifts, not from a parameter fitted to enforce that compensation. The suggestion that PCI data could later constrain scattering cross-sections is framed as a proposal for future work, not as a result derived from itself. The main acknowledged limitation is the assumption that a single optical dielectric constant faithfully describes screening on the femtosecond PCI scale; this is an uncertainty about the physical model, not a circularity, since the assumption is stated as an input rather than imported from the conclusion. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no load-bearing uniqueness claim is borrowed from self-citations, and no known result is merely relabelled. The derivation chain is therefore not circular, and any remaining concerns belong to correctness or model-validity risk rather than to circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central comparison leans on the free-atom semiclassical PCI theory, on the approximation that screening is a simple division by the optical dielectric constant, and on a set of external scattering cross-sections whose uncertainty spans a factor of about 5. The peak-broadening parameters are fitted to the PCI-free reference spectrum, not to the PCI data.

free parameters (5)
  • Optical dielectric constant for water = 1.8
    Chosen as an average optical epsilon for aqueous solutions; used to divide the PCI energy exchange to account for screening.
  • Main peak Gaussian FWHM (Cl- KLL) = 1.27 eV
    Fitted to the Cl- KLL peak well above threshold; used to broaden theoretical lineshapes.
  • Satellite component shift = -0.95 eV
    Second Voigt component shift fitted to the Cl- KLL peak; used in convolution.
  • Satellite Gaussian FWHM = 3.13 eV
    Fitted to the Cl- KLL peak; used in convolution.
  • Satellite-to-main amplitude ratio = 0.58
    Fitted to the Cl- KLL peak; used in convolution.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Free-atom eikonal PCI line shape (eq. 4) remains valid in condensed phase after modifications
    The paper builds on the semiclassical free-atom theory of Van der Straten et al.; its applicability to liquids with screening and scattering is assumed.
  • ad hoc to paper Coulomb screening can be represented by dividing the PCI energy exchange by the optical dielectric constant
    Introduced to extend the theory to condensed media; the authors note open questions about the correct epsilon and screening length scale (Sec. IV.A).
  • domain assumption Scattering of the Auger electron can be neglected; only photoelectron scattering matters
    Justified by detecting only unscattered Auger electrons and isotropic Auger emission; this is a simplification.
  • ad hoc to paper The classical or mixed semiclassical treatment of PCI from MC trajectories is a valid approximation
    The two approaches have complementary drawbacks; neither is rigorously justified, as acknowledged by the authors.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Post-collision interaction in the liquid phase: the role of electron scattering." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IEWCS2XL

@misc{pith2026250718734,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Post-collision interaction in the liquid phase: the role of electron scattering},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IEWCS2XL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.18734}
}
abstract

We report a detailed study of post-collision interaction (PCI) in a liquid medium. We investigate PCI for the Auger KLL electrons of solvated Cl$^-$, K$^+$ and Ca$^{2+}$. All three isoelectronic ions exhibit a very similar PCI behavior, which is little affected by changing the solvent from water to methanol or ethanol. The two main factors modifying the PCI interaction in condensed media is the screening of Coulombic interactions, and scattering of the electrons. The experimental results are compared with the predictions of a previously reported semi-classical PCI theory modified to account for screening and scattering. We show that a better agreement with experiment can be obtained by instead modeling scattering using electron transport Monte-Carlo simulations. We suggest that, in turn, PCI experimental data could be used as another experimental constraint to refine the currently insufficiently well-known scattering parameters of low-energy electrons in water, which are crucial in many fields.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.18734 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. KL2,3L2,3 Auger spectra of Cl−, K+ and Ca2+ in water. The black traces are spectra measured well above threshold (>800 eV) in conditions where PCI effects are neg￾ligible. The blue traces are spectra measured close to thresh￾old (∼ 6 eV above). The binding energy (BE) of the respec￾tive 1s shells is also indicated in the legend. spectra for the three ions approximately 6 eV above threshold. The binding energy of the… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. PCI shift (displacement of the peak maximum with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. PCI shift (displacement of the peak maximum with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of the experimental PCI lineshape at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Integral cross-sections for inelastic and elastic scat [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparison of PCI shifts for different theoretical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_7.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 59 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Free-atom theory As a starting point, we remind a few results of the free atom PCI theory as it has been described several decades ago already [1, 2, 4] for the case considered here of a simple Auger transition after photoionization. The amplitude of probability for detecting a photoelectron at an energy -E relative to its nominal position (or equiva- len...

    work page

  2. [2]

    We discuss the limitations of this approach later

    Modifications of the theory in condensed phase As stated in the introduction, we consider here that PCI in the condensed phase can be described by modi- fying the free-atom theory to account for two effects of the condensed phase: screening of the Coulomb inter- action, and scattering of the electrons. We discuss the limitations of this approach later. Sc...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Russek and W

    A. Russek and W. Mehlhorn, Post-collision interaction and the Auger lineshape, Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics 19, 911 (1986)

    work page 1986

  4. [4]

    van der Straten, R

    P. van der Straten, R. Morgenstern, and A. Niehaus, Angular dependent post-collision interaction in auger processes, Zeitschrift fur Physik D Atoms, Molecules and Clusters 8, 35 (1988)

    work page 1988

  5. [5]

    Schmidt, PCI Effects In Inner-Shell Photoionization, Le Journal de Physique Colloques 48, C9 (1987)

    V. Schmidt, PCI Effects In Inner-Shell Photoionization, Le Journal de Physique Colloques 48, C9 (1987)

    work page 1987

  6. [6]

    M. U. Kuchiev and S. A. She ˘ ınerman, Post-collision in- teraction in atomic processes, Soviet Physics Uspekhi 32, 569 (1989)

    work page 1989

  7. [7]

    Guillemin, S

    R. Guillemin, S. Sheinerman, R. P¨ uttner, T. Marchenko, G. Goldsztejn, L. Journel, R. K. Kushawaha, D. C´ eolin, M. N. Piancastelli, and M. Si- mon, Postcollision interaction effects in KLL Auger spectra following argon 1 s photoionization, Physical Review A 92, 012503 (2015)

    work page 2015

  8. [8]

    Lablanquie, S

    P. Lablanquie, S. Sheinerman, L. Andric, J. Palaudoux, Y. Hikosaka, K. Ito, and F. Penent, Post collision in- teraction probed by multi-electron coincidences: Appli- cation to the Ar 2s inner-shell photoionization, Journal of Electron Spectroscopy and Related Phenomena 185, 198 (2012)

    work page 2012

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    Gerchikov, P

    L. Gerchikov, P. Lablanquie, J. Palaudoux, F. Penent, and S. Sheinerman, Postcollision interaction in sequen- tial x-ray radiative and Auger decays after atomic inner- shell photoionization, Physical Review A 107, 062822 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    Lindblad, R

    A. Lindblad, R. F. Fink, H. Bergersen, M. Lundwall, T. Rander, R. Feifel, G. ¨Ohrwall, M. Tchaplyguine, U. Hergenhahn, S. Svensson, and O. Bj¨ orneholm, Post- collision interaction in noble gas clusters: Observation of differences in surface and bulk line shapes, The Jour- nal...

    2005

  3. [11]

    Peters, S

    S. Peters, S. Peredkov, B. Balkaya, N. Ferretti, M. Neeb, and W. Eberhardt, Evolution of metallic screening in small metal clusters probed by PCI-Auger spectroscopy, Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics 12, 9867 (2010)

    2010

  4. [12]

    Kass¨ uhlke, R

    B. Kass¨ uhlke, R. Romberg, P. Averkamp, and P. Feul- ner, Substrate Mediated Suppression of Postcollision Interaction Effects, Physical Review Letters 81, 2771 (1998)

    1998

  5. [13]

    Miller and T.-C

    T. Miller and T.-C. Chiang, Solid-state screening effect on the post-collision interaction, Physical Review B 29, 1121 (1984)

    1984

  6. [14]

    Jach and C

    T. Jach and C. J. Powell, L3VV Auger-Electron Line Shapes and Peak Positions for Near-Threshold Electron Excitation in Nickel and Copper, Physical Review Let- ters 46, 953 (1981)

    1981

  7. [15]

    Coward and S

    D. Coward and S. Thurgate, Post collision interaction in the L3–M4,5M4,5 Auger spectra in solid state copper, Journal of Electron Spectroscopy and Related Phenom- ena 107, 193 (2000)

    2000

  8. [16]

    M. K. Bahl, R. L. Watson, and K. J. Irgollic, Post- Collision Interaction in the Selenium L2M4,5M4,5 Auger Spectrum Following Photoionization, Physical Review Letters 42, 165 (1979)

    1979

  9. [17]

    T. C. Chiang, D. E. Eastman, F. J. Himpsel, G. Kaindl, and M. Aono, Observation of the Transition from Un- collapsed to Collapsed Excited f -Wave Functions in I- , Xe, and Cs+ via the Giant Post-Collision-Interaction Auger Effect, Physical Review Letters 45, 1846 (1980)

    1980

  10. [18]

    Velasquez, O

    N. Velasquez, O. Travnikova, R. Guillemin, I. Ismail, L. Journel, J. B. Martins, D. Koulentianos, D. C´ eolin, L. Fillaud, M. L. M. Rocco, R. P¨ uttner, M. N. Pi- ancastelli, M. Simon, S. Sheinerman, L. Gerchikov, and T. Marchenko, Generalization of the post-collision in- tera...

    2023

  11. [19]

    Miteva, N

    T. Miteva, N. V. Kryzhevoi, N. Sisourat, C. Nicolas, W. Pokapanich, T. Saisopa, P. Songsiriritthigul, Y. Rat- tanachai, A. Dreuw, J. Wenzel, L. S. Cederbaum, J.-P. Rueff, and D. C´ eolin, The All-Seeing Eye of Resonant Auger Electron Spectroscopy: A Study on Aqueous So- lution...

    2018

  12. [20]

    W. S. M. Werner, Electron transport in solids for quan- titative surface analysis, Surface and Interface Analysis 31, 141 (2001)

    2001

  13. [21]

    Smekal, W

    W. Smekal, W. S. M. Werner, and C. J. Powell, Simula- tion of electron spectra for surface analysis (SESSA): A novel software tool for quantitative Auger-electron spec- troscopy and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, Surface and Interface Analysis 37, 1059 (2005)

    2005

  14. [22]

    Signorell, M

    R. Signorell, M. Goldmann, B. L. Yoder, A. Bodi, E. Chasovskikh, L. Lang, and D. Luckhaus, Nanofo- cusing, shadowing, and electron mean free path in the photoemission from aerosol droplets, Chemical Physics Letters 658, 1 (2016)

    2016

  15. [23]

    Luckhaus, Y.-i

    D. Luckhaus, Y.-i. Yamamoto, T. Suzuki, and R. Sig- norell, Genuine binding energy of the hydrated electron, 11 Science Advances 3, e1603224 (2017)

    2017

  16. [24]

    Incerti, I

    S. Incerti, I. Kyriakou, M. A. Bernal, M. C. Bordage, Z. Francis, S. Guatelli, V. Ivanchenko, M. Karamitros, N. Lampe, S. B. Lee, S. Meylan, C. H. Min, W. G. Shin, P. Nieminen, D. Sakata, N. Tang, C. Villagrasa, H. N. Tran, and J. M. C. Brown, Geant4-DNA example applications f...

    2018 doi

  17. [25]

    C´ eolin, J

    D. C´ eolin, J. Ablett, D. Prieur, T. Moreno, J.-P. Ru- eff, T. Marchenko, L. Journel, R. Guillemin, B. Pilette, T. Marin, and M. Simon, Hard X-ray photoelec- tron spectroscopy on the GALAXIES beamline at the SOLEIL synchrotron, Journal of Electron Spectroscopy and Related Phe...

    2013

  18. [26]

    Malerz, F

    S. Malerz, F. Trinter, U. Hergenhahn, A. Ghrist, H. Ali, C. Nicolas, C.-M. Saak, C. Richter, S. Hartweg, L. Na- hon, C. Lee, C. Goy, D. M. Neumark, G. Meijer, I. Wilkinson, B. Winter, and S. Th¨ urmer, Low-energy constraints on photoelectron spectra measured from liq- uid wate...

    2021

  19. [27]

    Th¨ urmer, S

    S. Th¨ urmer, S. Malerz, F. Trinter, U. Hergenhahn, C. Lee, D. M. Neumark, G. Meijer, B. Winter, and I. Wilkinson, Accurate vertical ionization energy and work function determinations of liquid water and aque- ous solutions, Chemical Science 12, 10558 (2021)

    2021

  20. [28]

    P. W. Atkins, P. W. Atkins, and J. De Paula, Atkins’ Physical Chemistry , 7th ed. (Oxford University Press, Oxford ; New York, 2002)

    2002

  21. [29]

    J. V. Leyendekkers and R. J. Hunter, Refractive index of aqueous electrolyte solutions. Extrapolations to other temperatures, pressures, and wavelengths and to multi- component systems, Journal of Chemical & Engineering Data 22, 427 (1977)

    1977

  22. [30]

    Signorell, Electron Scattering in Liquid Water and Amorphous Ice: A Striking Resemblance, Physical Re- view Letters 124, 205501 (2020)

    R. Signorell, Electron Scattering in Liquid Water and Amorphous Ice: A Striking Resemblance, Physical Re- view Letters 124, 205501 (2020)

    2020

  23. [31]

    Schild, M

    A. Schild, M. Peper, C. Perry, D. Rattenbacher, and H. J. W¨ orner, Alternative Approach for the Determina- tion of Mean Free Paths of Electron Scattering in Liq- uid Water Based on Experimental Data, The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters 11, 1128 (2020)

    2020

  24. [32]

    Cleff and W

    B. Cleff and W. Mehlhorn, Angular distribution of L3M2,3M2,3(1S0) Auger electrons of argon, Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics 7, 605 (1974)

    1974

  25. [33]

    E. G. Berezhko and N. M. Kabachnik, Theoretical study of inner-shell alignment of atoms in electron impact ion- isation: Angular distribution and polarisation of X-rays and Auger electrons, Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics 10, 2467 (1977)

    1977

  26. [34]

    Michaud, A

    M. Michaud, A. Wen, and L. Sanche, Cross Sections for Low-Energy (1–100 eV) Electron Elastic and Inelastic Scattering in Amorphous Ice, Radiation Research 159, 3 (2003)

    2003

  27. [35]

    Nikjoo, D

    H. Nikjoo, D. Emfietzoglou, T. Liamsuwan, R. Taleei, D. Liljequist, and S. Uehara, Radiation track, DNA damage and response—a review, Reports on Progress in Physics 79, 116601 (2016)

    2016

  28. [36]

    C´ eolin, N

    D. C´ eolin, N. V. Kryzhevoi, Ch. Nicolas, W. Poka- panich, S. Choksakulporn, P. Songsiriritthigul, T. Saisopa, Y. Rattanachai, Y. Utsumi, J. Palaudoux, G. ¨Ohrwall, and J.-P. Rueff, Ultrafast Charge Transfer Processes Accompanying KLL Auger Decay in Aqueous KCl Solution, Phys...

    2017

  29. [37]

    C´ eolin, T

    D. C´ eolin, T. Miteva, J.-P. Rueff, R. Dupuy, T. Saisopa, Y. Rattanachai, G. ¨Ohrwall, S. Carni- ato, and R. P¨ uttner, Ultrafast Charge-Transfer and Auger Decay Processes in Aqueous CaCl $ 2$ Solu- tion: Insights from Core-Level Spectroscopy (2025), arXiv:2503.21517 [physics]

    2025 arXiv

  30. [38]

    J. C. Fuggle and J. E. Inglesfield, eds., Unoccupied Elec- tronic States: Fundamentals for XANES, EELS, IPS, and BIS, Topics in Applied Physics No. v. 69 (Springer- Verlag, Berlin ; New York, 1992)

    1992

  31. [39]

    Th¨ urmer, R

    S. Th¨ urmer, R. Seidel, M. Faubel, W. Eberhardt, J. C. Hemminger, S. E. Bradforth, and B. Winter, Photoelec- tron Angular Distributions from Liquid Water: Effects of Electron Scattering, Physical Review Letters 111, 173005 (2013)

    2013

  32. [40]

    Trinter, J

    F. Trinter, J. B. Williams, M. Weller, M. Waitz, M. Pitzer, J. Voigtsberger, C. Schober, G. Kastirke, C. M¨ uller, C. Goihl, P. Burzynski, F. Wiegandt, T. Bauer, R. Wallauer, H. Sann, A. Kalinin, L. Ph. H. Schmidt, M. Sch¨ offler, N. Sisourat, and T. Jahnke, Evo- lution of Int...

    2013

  33. [41]

    Vatin, A

    M. Vatin, A. Porro, N. Sator, J.-F. Dufrˆ eche, and H. Berthoumieux, Electrostatic interactions in water: A nonlocal electrostatic approach, Molecular Physics 119, e1825849 (2021)

    2021

  34. [42]

    Nicolas and C

    C. Nicolas and C. Miron, Lifetime broadening of core- excited and -ionized states, Journal of Electron Spec- troscopy and Related Phenomena 185, 267 (2012)

    2012

  35. [43]

    Th¨ urmer, M

    S. Th¨ urmer, M. Onˇ c´ ak, N. Ottosson, R. Seidel, U. Her- genhahn, S. E. Bradforth, P. Slav ´ ıˇ cek, and B. Winter, On the nature and origin of dicationic, charge-separated species formed in liquid water on X-ray irradiation, Na- ture Chemistry 5, 590 (2013)

    2013

  36. [44]

    Ottosson, M

    N. Ottosson, M. Faubel, S. E. Bradforth, P. Jungwirth, and B. Winter, Photoelectron spectroscopy of liquid wa- ter and aqueous solution: Electron effective attenua- tion lengths and emission-angle anisotropy, Journal of Electron Spectroscopy and Related Phenomena 177, 60 (2010)

    2010

  37. [45]

    Suzuki, K

    Y.-I. Suzuki, K. Nishizawa, N. Kurahashi, and T. Suzuki, Effective attenuation length of an electron in liquid water between 10 and 600 eV, Physical Review E 90, 010302 (2014)

    2014

  38. [46]

    Mondal, O

    A. Mondal, O. Neufeld, Z. Yin, Z. Nourbakhsh, V. Svo- boda, A. Rubio, N. Tancogne-Dejean, and H. J. W¨ orner, High-harmonic spectroscopy of low-energy electron- scattering dynamics in liquids, Nature Physics 19, 1813 (2023)

    2023

  39. [47]

    Data repository available at doi:10.5281/zenodo.15973036

    doi

  40. [48]

    Shinotsuka, B

    H. Shinotsuka, B. Da, S. Tanuma, H. Yoshikawa, C. J. Powell, and D. R. Penn, Calculations of electron inelas- tic mean free paths. XI. Data for liquid water for en- ergies from 50 eV to 30 keV: Calculations of electron inelastic mean free paths, Surface and Interface Analy- si...

    2017

  41. [49]

    Tougaard, Universality Classes of Inelastic Electron Scattering Cross-sections, Surface and Interface Analy- sis 25, 137 (1997)

    S. Tougaard, Universality Classes of Inelastic Electron Scattering Cross-sections, Surface and Interface Analy- sis 25, 137 (1997)

    1997

  42. [50]

    Emfietzoglou, K

    D. Emfietzoglou, K. Karava, G. Papamichael, and M. Moscovitch, Monte Carlo simulation of the energy 12 loss of low-energy electrons in liquid water, Physics in Medicine and Biology 48, 2355 (2003)

    2003

  43. [51]

    Plante and F

    I. Plante and F. A., Monte-Carlo Simulation of Ionizing Radiation Tracks, in Applications of Monte Carlo Meth- ods in Biology, Medicine and Other Fields of Science , edited by C. J. Mode (InTech, 2011)

    2011

  44. [52]

    Rudd, Cross Sections for Production of Secondary Electrons by Charged Particles, Radiation Protection Dosimetry 31, 17 (1990)

    M. Rudd, Cross Sections for Production of Secondary Electrons by Charged Particles, Radiation Protection Dosimetry 31, 17 (1990)

    1990

  45. [53]

    G. J. Kutcher and A. E. S. Green, A Model for Energy Deposition in Liquid Water, Radiation Research67, 408 (1976), 3574338

    1976

  46. [54]

    Aouchiche, C

    H. Aouchiche, C. Champion, and D. Oubaziz, Electron and positron elastic scattering in gaseous and liquid wa- ter: A comparative study, Radiation Physics and Chem- istry 77, 107 (2008)

    2008

  47. [55]

    D. J. Brenner and M. Zaider, A computationally conve- nient parameterisation of experimental angular distri- butions of low energy electrons elastically scattered off water vapour, Physics in Medicine and Biology 29, 443 (1984). Appendix A: Details on the Monte-Carlo Simulatio...

    1984

  48. [56]

    Scattering is governed by several parameters which are complex to model analytically, therefore Monte-Carlo simulations are an appropriate way to determine this average

    Electron transport As scattering is a stochastic process, r(t) will vary from event to event and we will consider a statistical av- erage of this quantity. Scattering is governed by several parameters which are complex to model analytically, therefore Monte-Carlo simulations a...

  49. [57]

    Ice cross-section parameter set The ice cross-section parameter set is called thus be- cause it is based on the scattering cross-sections deter- mined by Michaud and Sanche [32] using high-resolution electron energy loss spectroscopy (HREELS) on amor- phous ice films grown on ...

  50. [58]

    For the in- elastic scattering cross-section, we used the models for water ionization and excitation from respectively Rudd

    Model cross-section parameter set The second parameter set we built used instead cross- sections derived from commonly used semi-empirical models of scattering [49], which are mainly based on measured gas-phase water cross-sections. For the in- elastic scattering cross-section...

  51. [59]

    They give expres- sions for the differential cross-section for each ioniza- tion shell/excited state, which we sum and integrate to obtain the integral cross-section

    and Kutcher and Green [51]. They give expres- sions for the differential cross-section for each ioniza- tion shell/excited state, which we sum and integrate to obtain the integral cross-section. For the integral elastic scattering cross-section, we used the values calculated b...

  52. [60]

    A long discussion is dedicated to the differences between ice and gas cross- sections in Nikjoo et al

    Differences between the two parameter sets A major difference between the two parameter sets used here is that one is based off of the cross-sections determined for ice films, and the other one is mainly based on gas-phase cross-sections. A long discussion is dedicated to the ...

Pith tools

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