Three-body reaction dynamics in electron-ion dissociative recombination

2001 ◽  
Vol 3 (20) ◽  
pp. 4471-4480 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mats Larsson ◽  
Richard Thomas
2007 ◽  
Vol 98 (22) ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Zhaunerchyk ◽  
W. D. Geppert ◽  
M. Larsson ◽  
R. D. Thomas ◽  
E. Bahati ◽  
...  

2005 ◽  
Vol 123 (19) ◽  
pp. 194306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annemieke Petrignani ◽  
Patrik U. Andersson ◽  
Jan B. C. Pettersson ◽  
Richard D. Thomas ◽  
Fredrik Hellberg ◽  
...  

2005 ◽  
Vol 71 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
R. D. Thomas ◽  
F. Hellberg ◽  
A. Neau ◽  
S. Rosén ◽  
M. Larsson ◽  
...  

1996 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 637-646 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Singh ◽  
I. C. McDade ◽  
G. G. Shepherd ◽  
B. H. Solheim ◽  
W. E. Ward

Abstract. Volume emission rate profiles of the O(1D-1S) 5577 Å dayglow measured by the WIND imaging interferometer on the Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite are analyzed to examine the O(1S) excitation mechanisms in the sunlit lower thermosphere and upper mesosphere. The observed emission profiles are compared with theoretical profiles calculated using a model which takes into account all of the known daytime sources of O(1S). These include photoelectron impact on atomic oxygen, dissociative recombination of O+2, photodissociation of molecular oxygen, energy transfer from metastable N2(A3Σ+u) and three body recombination of atomic oxygen. Throughout most of the thermosphere the measured and modelled emission rates are in reasonably good agreement, given the limitations of the model, but in the region below 100 km, where the oxygen atom recombination source is likely to dominate, the measured emission rates are considerably larger than those modelled using the MSIS-90 oxygen atom densities. This discrepancy is discussed in terms of possible inadequacies in the MSIS-90 model atmosphere and/or additional sources of O(1S) at low altitude.


Author(s):  
Lionel Raff ◽  
Ranga Komanduri ◽  
Martin Hagan ◽  
Satish Bukkapatnam

In this chapter, several examples of NN fitting of databases obtained using either ab initio electronic structure methods or an empirical potential will be discussed. The objective of this presentation is not to provide a complete and comprehensive review of the field nor is it to acquaint the reader with the details of the reaction dynamics of the particular systems employed as examples. It is rather to provide a clear picture of the power and limitations of NN methods for the investigation of reaction dynamics. We begin with a brief overview of the literature in the field. Neural networks provide a powerful method to effect the fitting of an ensemble of potential energy points in a database. In 1993, Blank et al. employed an NN to fit data derived from an empirical potential model for CO chemisorbed on a Ni(111) surface. Two years later, these same investigators also examined the interaction potential of H2 on a Si(100)-2 × 1 surface using a data set comprising 750 energies computed using local density functional theory. To the best of our knowledge, these were the first two examples in which NNs were employed to provide the PES for a dynamics study. Hobday et al. have investigated the energies of C-H systems by using a Tersoff potential form in which the three-body term is replaced by an NN comprising five input nodes, one hidden layer with six nodes, and an output layer. In this work, the five input elements are computed by consideration of the bond type, i.e., C-C or C-H, the three-body bond angle θ, which is input to the NN in the form (1 + cos θ)2, the connectivity of the local environment, and the second neighbor information. The method was applied to carbon clusters and a wide variety of alkanes, alkenes, alkynes, aromatics, and radicals. Comparison of the atomization energies obtained using the NN potential surfaces with experimental values showed the errors for 12 alkanes, 13 alkenes, 4 alkynes, 7 aromatics, and 12 radicals to lie in the ranges zero to 0.3 eV (alkanes), 0.1 to 1.5 eV (alkenes), 0 to 0.5 eV (alkynes), zero to 1.0 eV (aromatics), and zero to 2.8 eV (radicals).


Author(s):  
R. Thomas ◽  
S. Datz ◽  
M. Larsson ◽  
W. J. van der Zande ◽  
F. Hellberg ◽  
...  

1969 ◽  
Vol 47 (10) ◽  
pp. 1711-1719 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manfred A. Biondi

The electron–ion and ion–ion recombination processes of importance in the upper atmosphere are considered, and available laboratory experimental and theoretical information concerning the relevant processes is discussed. For atomic ions the principal electron–ion recombination process is radiative, with theory indicating that the two-body coefficient at ∼200 °K is ∼10−11 cm3/s and decreases with increasing electron temperature. Microwave afterglow/mass spectrometer studies of diatomic ionospheric ions (e.g. NO+, O2+, and N2+) show a loss by dissociative recombination with a coefficient substantially in excess of 10−7 cm3/s at 250 °K and decreasing with increasing electron and ion temperature. There is some evidence from flame studies that H3O+ ions exhibit a very large coefficient (10−6–10−5 cm3/s) at 300 °K. Ion–ion recombination evidently proceeds by mutual neutralization, with laboratory studies of ions such as NO+ and NO2− indicating a two-body coefficient of the order of 10−7 cm3/s at 300 °K. In the lower D region, three-body Thomson recombination may be important, since laboratory studies of "air" ions indicate a three-body coefficient of ∼2 × 10−25 cm6/s at 300 °K.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document