Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42500214›Full record

ArticleACS physical chemistry Au2026

Ultrafast Spectroscopy with an

Caleb H DeWitt, Aditi Bhattacherjee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ACS physical chemistry Au, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Caleb H DeWittDepartment of Chemistry, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, United States.
Aditi BhattacherjeeDepartment of Chemistry, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7146-1128

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electronic absorption spectroscopy tools have long been part of the arsenal of molecular spectroscopy techniques to investigate the properties of valence electrons and chemical bonds. However, in recent years, this toolkit has rapidly expanded into the shallow and inner core orbitals, permitting a nuanced understanding of reaction dynamics in excited electronic states from the vantage points of distinct atomic sites. As these tools continue to be innovated, particularly in tabletop implementations, we provide an overview of how such versatile light pulses are (i) generated and (ii) applied in basic research laboratories, not only to answering long-standing questions in molecular spectroscopy but also to tackling emerging problems in energy conversion and quantum information science. In this tutorial review, we dive into a conceptual understanding of how femtosecond extreme-ultraviolet and soft X-ray pulses provide mechanistic understanding of ultrafast chemical dynamics through tracking wide regions of the molecular phase space with atomic-site fidelity. We further explain the nuts and bolts of a typical tabletop apparatus that control the parameters that determine the spectral and temporal resolution from the experimentalist's standpoint. Finally, we circle back to spectroscopic selection rules from first-principles, connecting to several benchmark studies where femtosecond time-resolved X-ray absorption spectroscopy provides a cutting "edge" in the real-time mapping of nonadiabatic processes that operate far away from chemical equilibrium. Potential pitfalls and complementary methodologies that map other details of the evolution of electronic and nuclear structures on ultrafast time scales are discussed.

Indexed as

coreelectronicextreme ultravioletnear-edgenonadiabatictransientultrafastvalenceX-ray

Identifiers

PMID42500214
PMCPMC13397460

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.