scholarly journals Real-Time Description of the Electronic Dynamics for a Molecule Close to a Plasmonic Nanoparticle

2016 ◽  
Vol 120 (50) ◽  
pp. 28774-28781 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvio Pipolo ◽  
Stefano Corni
2015 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 974-982 ◽  
Author(s):  
Baudouin Denis de Senneville ◽  
Abdallah El Hamidi ◽  
Chrit Moonen
Keyword(s):  

2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 1243-1250
Author(s):  
薛志鹏 XUE Zhi-peng ◽  
贾宏光 JIA Hong-guang ◽  
厉明 LI Ming ◽  
马伍元 MA Wu-yuan ◽  
李艳辉 LI Yan-hui

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (44) ◽  
pp. 24457-24465 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessio Petrone ◽  
David B. Lingerfelt ◽  
Nadia Rega ◽  
Xiaosong Li

Real-time TDDFT electronic dynamics for studying the charge separation mechanisms in donor/acceptor block copolymers.


The Analyst ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 142 (3) ◽  
pp. 409-420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tao Xie ◽  
Chao Jing ◽  
Yi-Tao Long

In this mini review, we will provide a brief introduction focusing on the current applications of single plasmonic nanoparticle-based sensors using DFM, including the detection of molecules, the real-time monitoring of chemical/electrochemical reactions and the imaging of living cells.


Atmosphere ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. 1003
Author(s):  
Alessio Pignalberi ◽  
Marco Pietrella ◽  
Michael Pezzopane

This paper focuses on a detailed comparison, based on the F2-layer peak characteristics foF2 and hmF2, between the International Reference Ionosphere (IRI), which is a climatological empirical model of the terrestrial ionosphere, and the IRI Real-Time Assimilative Mapping (IRTAM) procedure, which is a real-time version of IRI based on data assimilation from a global network of ionosondes. To perform such a comparison, two different kinds of datasets have been considered: (1) foF2 and hmF2 as recorded by 40 ground-based ionosondes spread all over the world from 2000 to 2019; (2) foF2 and hmF2 from space-based COSMIC/FORMOSAT-3 radio occultation measurements recorded from 2006 to 2018. The aim of the paper is to understand whether and how much IRTAM improves IRI foF2 and hmF2 outputs for different locations and under different diurnal, seasonal, solar and magnetic activity conditions. The main outcomes of the study are: (1) when ionosonde observations are considered for validation, IRTAM significantly improves the IRI foF2 modeling both in accuracy and precision, while a slight improvement in the IRI hmF2 modeling is observed for specific locations and conditions; (2) when COSMIC observations are considered for validation, no noticeable improvement is observed from the IRTAM side for both foF2 and hmF2. Indeed, IRTAM can improve the IRI foF2 description only nearby the assimilated ionosonde locations, while the IRI hmF2 description is always more accurate and precise than IRTAM one.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document