Experimental quantum error correction

An alternative way to obtain the spectral density is by numerical simulation. It is possible, at least in principle, to include the intramolecular modes in this case, although it is rarely done [198]. A standard approach [33-36,41] utilizes molecular dynamics (MD) trajectories to compute the classical real time correlation function of the reaction coordinate from which the spectral density is calculated by the cosine transformation [classical limit of Eq. (9.3)]. The correspondence between the quantum and the classical densities of states via J(co) is a key for the evaluation of the quantum rate constant, that is, one can use the quantum expression for /Cj2 with the classically computed J(co). This is true only for a purely harmonic system [199]. Real solvent modes are anharmonic, although the response may well be linear. The spectral density of the harmonic system is temperature independent. For real nonlinear systems, J co) can strongly depend on temperature [200]. Thus, in a classical simulation one cannot assess equilibrium quantum populations correctly, which may result in serious errors in the computed high-frequency part of the spectrum. Song and Marcus [37] compared the results of several simulations for water available at that time in the literature [34,201] with experimental data [190]. The comparison was not in favor of those simulations. In particular, they failed to predict... 

One additional important reason why nonbonded parameters from quantum chemistry cannot be used directly, even if they could be calculated accurately, is that they have to implicitly account for everything that has been neglected three-body terms, polarization, etc. (One should add that this applies to experimental parameters as well A set of parameters describing a water dimer in vacuum will, in general, not give the correct properties of bulk liquid water.) Hence, in practice, it is much more useful to tune these parameters to reproduce thermodynamic or dynamical properties of bulk systems (fluids, polymers, etc.) [51-53], Recently, it has been shown, how the cumbersome trial-and-error procedure can be automated [54-56A],... 

Millot et al [110] have also compared the second virial coefficient, B2(T), over the range of temperature 373-975 K with the analogous data relevant to the potentials cited above using the experimental data of Kell et al [183] as a benchmark. The latter are reproduced satisfactorily by ASP-W2 and ASP-W4 with quantum corrections, that account for 10-15% of the total at 327 K and up to 35% at 273 K. The other models lead to worse results, with typical errors ranging from —55% for NEM03 to —6% for KJ and NCC. 

Calculated DFT properties listed in Table 1 were obtained from the fit of the ground-state potential energy curves to 12 points calculated around the energy minimum [32]. Dissociation energy has been corrected for basis set superposition error by a standard counterpoise technique. The local approximation to the exchange and correlation gives the best fit to bond distances, theoretical values differ by no more than 0.03 A (4%) from the experimental ones (see Table 1). Vibrational frequencies are also predicted to lie within 1 % off the experiment. One should remember, however, that other advanced quantum chemical methods give equally satisfactory results for these, basicaly one-electron quantities and that inclusion of nonlocal effects does not improve the DFT predictions. The dipole moment, fi, is much more sensitive... 

One may say, perhaps, that some factor must still be introduced in the theoretical expression to obtain the correct magnitude of 6 and the experimental observations offer a means of evaluating this. But, unfortunately, the theoretical probabilities do not have even the right relative values. They decrease with quantum number while for the experimental values Tolman and Badger found a decided increase. The absolute values which they calculated may be in error for the reasons given above, but more perfect resolution would be expected to increase the trend they observed rather than to eliminate it. It would seem, therefore, that the predictions of the new quantum theory, while they may apply to some ideal system, do not describe the conditions we have experimentally observed in the case of hydrogen chloride. 

Determination of quantum yields for stilbene is prone to several experimental difficulties and systematic errors [92-99], A back-reaction correction has been introduced by Lamola and Hammond [139] and modified by Saltiel [105], Earlier, Smakula [94] found higher values for stilbene in hexane on irradiation at 313 nm than at 265 nm, but later studies showed that Ajrr has no effect (within experimental error) on and Oc in contrast to the case of azobenzene [89], Values for and (%cis)ps of stilbene in various solvents... 

From Eq. (9) it is clear that correct determination of QY depends on accurate knowledge of the overall detection efficiency/, which is generally about 0.5. It can be determined in two ways. One is to compare the measured ratio C2+/C+ with the calculated ratio for an atomic rare gas such as Xe at a wavelength where the true relative production ratio A2+/N+ is known from photoionization mass spectrometric measurement of the ion yields. This method has been used in deriving the Xe data of Fig. 15. As expected, the quantum yield in the atomic case is unity (100%) within experimental error this must be generally true because deactivation of superexcited states by light emission is very rare. Thus the second and quicker method is simply to measure the apparent QY for an atomic gas and determine / accordingly. 

Ab initio interaction energies were used as the reference data for the validation because the experimental IPESs of these interactions are not available. The ab initio IPES was calculated through the supermolecular scheme in which the basis set superposition error (BSSE) was corrected with the counterpoise (CP) method [28]. The calculations were performed at the MP2 level with a qualified basis set. For each system, the configurations were systematically selected to reflect the diversity of the interaction. Therefore, although the calculated configurations may not be sufficient for an elaborate IPES, they can reflect the major characteristics of the interaction. All quantum chemical calculations were performed with the Gaussian 94 program [29] on an IBM 8-node SP2 processor. 

Table 3.1. Contributions of various physical effects (non-relativistic, Bieit, QED, and beyond QED, distinct physical contributions shown in bold) to the ionization energy and the dipole polarizability a of the helium atom, as well as comparison with the experimental values (all quantities are expressed in atomic units i.e.. e = 1. fi = 1, mo = 1- where iiiq denotes the rest mass of the electron). The first column gives the symbol of the term in the Breit-Pauli Hamiltonian [Eq. (3.72)] as well as of the QED corrections given order by order (first corresponding to the electron-positron vacuum polarization (QED), then, beyond quantum electrodynamics, to other particle-antiparticle pairs (non-QED) li,7T,. ..) split into several separate effects. The second column contains a short description of the effect. The estimated error (third and fourth columns) is given in parentheses in the units of the last figure reported. 

Upon comparison of the rf < 3.52 A results and the experimental results given in Table 13.2, two things are immediately apparent. First, the order of magnitude predicted by our one parameter model is correct. The percent error is only 14% for St5. The second major observation is that the experiment predicts a trend of increasing [2+2] quantum yield from Stl to St3 to St5, while the MD results predict the opposite trend. There are a couple of possible reasons for this, all stemming from the limitations of the model. First, the model depends on the accuracy of the force... 

---