Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 42 references

The Influence of Molecular Architecture on the Dynamics of H-Bonded Supramolecular Structures in Phenyl-Propanols

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Even 1-phenyl-1-propanol retains a Debye relaxation, so hydrogen-bonded supramolecular structures persist in every phenyl-propanol isomer studied.

desk verdict A careful BDS/PCS study that likely resolves a controversy about 1-phenyl-1-propanol, but the key separation rests on an assumption the authors openly flag; deserves peer review. read the letter →

arxiv 1909.00646 v1 pith:4745KNCB submitted 2019-09-02 cond-mat.soft

Till Böhmer , Jan Gabriel , Timo Richter , Florian Pabst , Thomas Blochowicz This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.soft
keywords Debyeprocessmonohydroxyalcoholsphenyl-propanolshydrogenbondingsupramolecularstructuresdielectricspectroscopyphotoncorrelationKirkwood-Fröhlichfactor
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

Supercooled monohydroxy alcohols show a slow, nearly exponential Debye relaxation that is read as the dynamics of transient hydrogen-bonded chains, but bulky side groups are thought to suppress those structures. This paper studies three phenyl-propanol isomers plus 1-propanol by combining broadband dielectric spectroscopy with depolarized photon correlation spectroscopy and calorimetry. It argues that the $\alpha$-relaxation has the same shape in all four alcohols and contains no Debye component in the light-scattering spectra, so any excess slow dielectric peak must come from cross-correlations of hydrogen-bonded supramolecular structures. On that basis the paper identifies a Debye contribution in every isomer, including 1-phenyl-1-propanol, where an earlier study had declared it absent. The conclusion is that steric hindrance does not eliminate hydrogen bonding; it shifts the balance of ring-like and chain-like supramolecular structures toward rings.

What carries the argument

The mechanism that carries the argument is the joint analysis of two correlation functions of different rank: dielectric spectroscopy probes the vector dipole moment (rank $\ell = 1$), while depolarized photon correlation spectroscopy probes the tensor polarizability of the phenyl ring (rank $\ell = 2$). Assuming the $\alpha$-relaxation is identical in shape and timescale in both methods, the paper uses the PCS spectrum as the known self-correlation contribution and represents each BDS spectrum as the weighted sum of that common $\alpha$-process and a stretched exponential Debye-like process. The correlation factor $g_k$ computed from the static permittivity then connects the strength of that slow process to orientational cross-correlations between neighboring dipoles, discriminating chain-like ($g_k > 1$) from ring-like ($g_k < 1$) arrangements.

What would settle it

Measure the alpha relaxation in 1-phenyl-1-propanol with a technique whose molecular probe differs from the phenyl-ring anisotropy, for example deuteron NMR on a hydroxyl deuteron, and check whether the self-correlation relaxation function matches the PCS-derived alpha process in shape and time scale at the same temperature; a clear mismatch would falsify the decomposition that produces the Debye component.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that hydrogen-bonded supramolecular structures are present in all investigated phenyl-propanols, and that the Debye process is not suppressed even in 1-phenyl-1-propanol, where the phenyl ring sits adjacent to the hydroxy group. The paper reaches this by treating the PCS spectrum, whose probe is the phenyl ring's optical anisotropy, as the $\alpha$-relaxation's self-correlation shape, and fitting the dielectric spectrum as that same $\alpha$-process plus one slow, slightly stretched Debye-like component representing cross-correlations. The Debye strength decreases monotonically as the phenyl ring moves closer to the hydroxy group, matching the static dielectric correlation factor $g_k$. Because 1-phenyl-1-propanol still shows a finite Debye contribution while its correlation factor approaches unity at high temperature, the paper interprets the hydrogen-bond equilibrium there as a coexistence of ring- and chain-like structures that shifts toward rings, rather than a breakdown of hydrogen bonding.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the alpha relaxation recorded by light scattering, the phenyl ring's rank-two reorientation, has exactly the same shape and timescale as the rank-one dipole self-correlation recorded dielectrically; if that fails, the extra slow dielectric component could be an artifact of comparing two different molecular probes.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the claim holds, every phenyl-propanol isomer, including 1-phenyl-1-propanol, must be counted among monoalcohols whose dielectric spectra contain a slow cross-correlation process, overturning the earlier conclusion that steric hindrance fully suppresses hydrogen-bonded structure formation in 1P1P.
  • The common $\alpha$-relaxation shape across 1-propanol and its phenyl isomers means the differences between dielectric spectra can be attributed entirely to the Debye-like component, making the series a clean testbed for how molecular architecture tunes supramolecular association.
  • The systematic decrease of Debye strength and of $g_k$ as the phenyl ring approaches the hydroxy group provides a quantitative scale for how steric hindrance biases the ring/chain equilibrium toward ring-like structures.
  • Because the dynamic separation $\tau_D/\tau_\alpha$ stays roughly constant in 1-phenyl-1-propanol but decreases on cooling in the other two phenyl isomers, the temperature dependence of that separation becomes a diagnostic for the presence of ring-like structures.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Not claimed by the paper: if the ring/chain equilibrium is right, pressure or high electric fields, which are known to open rings into chains, should strengthen the Debye peak most dramatically in 1-phenyl-1-propanol, the isomer with the largest inferred ring fraction.
  • Not claimed by the paper: the same combined dielectric and light-scattering subtraction strategy could be applied to the unexplained calorimetric decoupling observed in 3-phenyl-1-propanol to test whether that decoupling is tied to supramolecular structure or to something else.
  • Not claimed by the paper: a direct check of the rank-equivalence assumption could come from measuring the $\alpha$-relaxation in these isomers by $^{2}$H NMR on the hydroxyl group; a mismatch with the PCS-derived shape would weaken the central decomposition.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports a combined dielectric spectroscopy (BDS), photon correlation spectroscopy (PCS), and calorimetry study of three phenyl-propanol isomers (1P1P, 2P1P, 3P1P) and 1-propanol. The central claim is that a Debye-like relaxation, attributed to transient hydrogen-bonded supramolecular structures, is present in the dielectric spectra of all investigated phenyl-propanols, including 1P1P, contrary to an earlier report. By assuming the alpha relaxation probed by PCS has the same shape and timescale as the self-correlational part of the dielectric spectrum, the authors decompose the BDS spectra into a PCS-derived alpha/beta contribution and an additional slow, mostly Debye-like process. The strength of this Debye contribution decreases as the phenyl ring is moved closer to the hydroxy group, consistent with a shift from chain-like toward ring-like H-bonded structures. The authors also analyze the Kirkwood-Fröhlich correlation factor and calorimetric time constants to support the interpretation.

Significance. If the conclusion holds, the paper corrects the earlier claim that steric hindrance in 1P1P fully suppresses H-bonded supramolecular structures, and it shows that the phenyl position tunes the ring/chain equilibrium rather than merely suppressing chain formation. The combination of BDS and PCS as complementary probes of self- and cross-correlations is a valuable experimental strategy, and the systematic study of an isomer series with a fixed OH position provides a clean platform for testing architecture-dependent H-bonding. The authors are transparent about the key assumption, present previously unpublished DFT-based anisotropy and polarizability data, and include a quantitative Kirkwood-Fröhlich analysis with propagated uncertainties. The paper is likely to be of interest to the dielectric-spectroscopy and molecular-dynamics community.

major comments (3)
  1. [Results and Data Analysis, Eq. (5); Discussion] The central decomposition of the BDS spectra into an alpha self-correlation and a Debye cross-correlation relies on the assumption that the PCS spectrum, dominated by the phenyl ring's optical anisotropy (l=2), represents exactly the same alpha relaxation as the OH-dipole self-correlation probed by BDS (l=1). The paper states this assumption explicitly ('Assuming the alpha-relaxation to be the same in shape and timescale in both methods'), and later concedes 'it is non-trivial that processes from l=1 and l=2 correlation functions are indeed identical.' This equivalence is load-bearing, especially for 1P1P, where the alpha-Debye separation is smallest (Fig. 6a) and the Debye strength is weakest (Fig. 7b). If the OH self-correlation differs in shape or timescale from the phenyl-ring reorientation, the apparent slow component in 1P1P could be an artifact of probe mismatch rather than a genuine Debye process. Please provide a quantitative validation: for a system with a well-resolved Debye process (e.g., 1P), compare the alpha shape fitted directly from BDS (allowing a separate alpha contribution) with the PCS-derived alpha shape, and estimate whether the observed mismatch, if any, could produce a spurious Debye-like residual of the magnitude reported in 1P1P. Doing so for at least one phenyl-propanol would materially strengthen the conclusion.
  2. [Figs. 6 and 7; Eq. (5)] The Debye relaxation strengths and time constants are presented in Figs. 6 and 7 without uncertainties or confidence intervals. Given the multi-parameter fit in Eq. (5) (with Δε_D, β_KWW,D, Δε_αβ, and the PCS interpolation parameters), it is not possible to assess whether the reported Debye component in 1P1P is statistically significant. The KWW stretching parameter is constrained to 0.85 < β_KWW,D ≤ 1, and the fit range is described qualitatively, but no error bars are shown. Please report parameter uncertainties and perform a robustness check: for instance, fix β_KWW,D = 1, or vary the PCS interpolation within its own uncertainty, and show that the existence and approximate strength of the Debye component in 1P1P are robust. Without such an analysis, the reader cannot distinguish a genuine Debye contribution from a fitting artifact of the assumed spectral decomposition.
  3. [Fig. 2; Results and Data Analysis] The normalization of the PCS spectra is not sufficiently defined. The text says that 'the normalized PCS spectra are shifted by the factor Δεαβ' and that 'the amplitudes of the PCS spectra were shifted according to the data analysis.' Since PCS does not yield absolute relaxation strengths, it is essential to state how Δεαβ is determined in Eq. (5): is it a free fit parameter, and if so, how is it identified? The description that 'differences... were dealt with by constraining the frequency range in which the interpolation with equation (5) is calculated' is vague; please specify the exact frequency range used for each system and temperature, and how this choice affects the extracted Debye parameters. This is important because the Debye strength is essentially the difference between the measured BDS spectrum and the scaled PCS spectrum.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors: 'follwing' should be 'following' in the Results and Data Analysis section, 'desribed' should be 'described' in the same section, 'sepctra' should be 'spectra' in the Conclusions, and 'develope' should be 'develop' in the Discussion. These do not affect the science but should be corrected in a revised version.
  2. [Fig. 7 and text] In Fig. 7(b), the y-axis label reads '∆εD x T/Tg' and the text refers to 'the relaxation strength εD'. Please use a consistent notation, e.g., Δε_D throughout, and define the plotted quantity explicitly (Δε_D · T/T_g).
  3. [Discussion] The abbreviation 'JG-β-process' is introduced in the Discussion ('if the JG-β-process at high frequencies is disregarded') without definition. Please spell out 'Johari-Goldstein' at first use and clarify whether this refers to the same secondary relaxation described as the β-process in the Results section.
  4. [Fig. 6] The upper panel of Fig. 6 is described as displaying τD/τα, but the axis label in the figure appears to combine 'log(τ)' with 'τD/τα', which is confusing. Please make the y-axis label explicit and ensure it matches the description in the text.
  5. [References] Reference [14] lists the journal and DOI but omits page numbers; please complete the bibliographic details to meet the journal's reference format.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Debye decomposition is anchored by independent PCS spectra and the l=1/l=2 identity is a stated physical assumption, not a derived conclusion.

full rationale

The paper does not present a first-principles derivation; it reports an experimental decomposition. The central analysis assumes the alpha relaxation is identical in shape and timescale in PCS and BDS ('Assuming the alpha-relaxation to be the same in shape and timescale in both methods...') and then fits the dielectric spectrum as the sum of the measured PCS-derived spectrum and a Debye/KWW process (Eq. 5). The Debye component is a fitted spectral contribution with its own relaxation time and stretching parameter, not merely the residual of the subtraction, and its strength varies systematically across isomers. The load-bearing assumption that l=1 and l=2 correlation functions are equivalent is explicitly acknowledged as non-trivial, and the paper supports it with the case of 1-propanol, where alpha and Debye relaxations are well separated in the dielectric spectrum, as well as with prior theoretical and experimental work (e.g., Ref. 37 and previous monoalcohol studies). This makes the assumption a physical premise with independent grounding rather than a circular redefinition. The abstract's phrasing that the alpha shape is 'monitored by PCS and BDS' is slightly stronger than the data warrant, because the BDS alpha shape is assumed equal to the PCS shape in the fit; however, this overstatement does not constitute a circular derivation of the paper's main claim. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem or self-citation chain is used to force the conclusion. The analysis is self-contained in the sense that the PCS spectra provide an external observable against which the dielectric spectra are decomposed.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central claim rests on domain assumptions about the equivalence of PCS and BDS alpha modes and on a model-based decomposition of the dielectric spectrum into a self-correlation part and a Debye-like part. No new physical entities are proposed. The fitted parameters are standard relaxation strengths, timescales, stretch exponents, and auxiliary inputs like the epsilon_infinity prefactor.

free parameters (6)
  • KWW stretching exponent for Debye process beta_KWW,D = 0.85 to 1, temperature dependent
    Introduced to allow slight broadening of the cross-correlational contribution. The fitted values are used to infer incomplete dynamic separation and support the Debye-like interpretation.
  • Debye relaxation strength Delta_epsilon_D = not tabulated; varies with temperature
    Fitted amplitude of the slow process. Its systematic decrease from 3P1P to 1P1P is the central observable in Figure 7b.
  • Alpha-beta self-correlation strength Delta_epsilon_alpha_beta = not tabulated
    Fitted scaling factor that matches the PCS-derived self-correlation spectrum to the BDS data in Equation (5).
  • PCS fast-dynamics amplitude Afast = 0.05
    Estimated rather than derived; enters the heterodyne Siegert analysis and affects absolute PCS amplitudes, though PCS spectra are later normalized.
  • Prefactor for epsilon_infinity = 1.1
    Chosen following Ref 12 as epsilon_infinity = 1.1 n^2. The paper includes +/-0.05 uncertainty in gK error bars and admits that gK for 1P1P is sensitive to this choice.
  • Molecular polarizability for Lorentz-Lorenz density = 16.91 Angstrom^3
    DFT-calculated input used to derive density from refractive index; affects the Kirkwood-Frohlich factor but not the central Debye peak identification.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption PCS and BDS alpha relaxation are identical in shape and timescale for the investigated alcohols.
    Invoked in Results and Data Analysis: "Assuming the alpha-relaxation to be the same in shape and timescale in both methods...". Supported only by prior studies and the observed shape coincidence, not by direct proof for these molecules.
  • domain assumption Cross-correlational (Debye) contributions are negligible in PCS spectra of monoalcohols.
    Used to identify the PCS signal with the self-correlation alpha process. Relies on Refs 14 and 15, which are from the same group.
  • domain assumption The phenyl-ring anisotropy probed by PCS and the OH dipole probed by BDS reorient with the same molecular dynamics.
    For phenyl alcohols, PCS is dominated by the phenyl ring while the dipole is at the hydroxy group. The paper notes anisotropic relaxation could cause differences; this underpins using PCS alpha to interpret BDS.
  • domain assumption The slow dielectric contribution is adequately modeled by a KWW function with 0.85 < beta <= 1, additively superimposed on the self-correlation spectrum.
    Equation (5) assumes this superposition. No alternative models, such as a simple alpha-process without a Debye term, are tested.
  • domain assumption The Kirkwood-Frohlich equation with literature dipole moment and epsilon_infinity = 1.1 n^2 is valid for these systems.
    Used to calculate gK in Equation (6). The paper itself notes high sensitivity to epsilon_infinity for 1P1P.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Influence of Molecular Architecture on the Dynamics of H-Bonded Supramolecular Structures in Phenyl-Propanols." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4745KNCB

@misc{pith2026190900646,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Influence of Molecular Architecture on the Dynamics of H-Bonded Supramolecular Structures in Phenyl-Propanols},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4745KNCB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1909.00646}
}
read the original abstract

The relaxation behaviour of monohydroxy alcohols (monoalcohols) in broadband dielectric spectroscopy (BDS) is usually dominated by the Debye process. This process is regarded as a signature of the dynamics of transient supramolecular structures formed by H-bonding. In phenyl propanols the steric hindrance of the phenyl ring is assumed to influence chain formation and thereby to decrease or even suppress the intensity of the Debye process. In the present paper we study this effect in a systematic series of structural isomers of phenyl-1-propanol in comparison with 1-propanol. It turns out that by combining BDS, Photon Correlation Spectroscopy (PCS) and calorimetry the dynamics of supramolecular structures can be uncovered. While light scattering spectra show the same spectral shape of the main relaxation for all investigated monoalcohols, the dielectric spectra differ in the Debye contribution. Thus it becomes possible for the first time to unambiguously disentangle both relaxation modes in the dielectric spectra. It turns out that the Debye relaxation gets weaker the closer the position of phenyl ring is to the hydroxy group, in accordance with the analysis of the Kirkwood-Fr\"ohlich correlation factor. Even in 1-phenyl-1-propanol, which has the phenyl group attached at the closest position to the hydroxy group, we can separate a Debye-contribution in the dielectric spectrum. From this we conclude that hydrogen bonds are not generally suppressed by the increased steric hindrance of the phenyl ring, but rather an equilibrium of ring and chain-like structures is shifted towards ring-like shapes on shifting the phenyl ring closer to the hydroxy group. Moreover, the shape of the alpha-relaxation as monitored by PCS and BDS remains unaffected by the degree of hydrogen bonding and is the same among the investigated alcohols.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1909.00646 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Overview of the investigated monoalcohols: (a) 1- [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Generalized susceptibilities measured in BDS ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Temperature dependent Kirkwood/Fröhlich corre [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Overview of possible supramolecular structures in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Comparison of relaxation spectra of the different [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Lower plot (b) shows BDS time constants of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Upper plot (a) displays the temperature dependent [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    C. J. F. Böttcher and P. Bordewijk,Theory of Electric Polarization II: Dielectrics in time-dependent fields(El- sevier, Amsterdam, London, New York, 1978)

    work page 1978

  2. [2]

    Böhmer, C

    R. Böhmer, C. Gainaru, and R. Richert, Physics Reports 545, 125 (2014)

    work page 2014

  3. [3]

    Hansen, F

    C. Hansen, F. Stickel, T. Berger, R. Richert, and E. W. Fischer, The Journal of Chemical Physics 107, 1086 (1997)

    work page 1997

  4. [5]

    Kremer and A

    F. Kremer and A. Schönhals,Broadband Dielectric Spec- troscopy, 1st ed. (Springer, 2002)

    work page 2002

  5. [6]

    G. P. Johari and W. Dannhauser, J. Phys. Chem.72, 3273 (1968)

    work page 1968

  6. [7]

    Dannhauser, The Journal of Chemical Physics 48, 1911 (1968)

    W. Dannhauser, The Journal of Chemical Physics 48, 1911 (1968)

    work page 1968

  7. [8]

    Hecksher and B

    T. Hecksher and B. Jakobsen, The Journal of Chemical Physics 141, 101104 (2014)

    work page 2014

  8. [9]

    L. P. Singh and R. Richert, Physical Review Letters109, 167802 (2012)

    work page 2012

Show all 42 references
  1. [10]

    A. R. Young-Gonzales and R. Richert, The Journal of Chemical Physics 145, 074503 (2016)

    2016

  2. [11]

    Pawlus, M

    S. Pawlus, M. Wikarek, C. Gainaru, M. Paluch, and R. Böhmer, J. Chem. Phys.139, 064501 (2013)

    2013

  3. [12]

    G. P. Johari and W. Dannhauser, Physics and Chemistry of Liquids 3, 1 (1972)

    1972

  4. [13]

    G. P. Johari, O. E. Kalinovskaya, and J. K. Vij, J. Chem. Phys. 114, 4634 (2001)

    2001

  5. [14]

    Gabriel, F

    J. Gabriel, F. Pabst, and T. Blochowicz, The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 121 (2017), 10.1021/acs.jpcb.7b06134

    2017 doi

  6. [15]

    Gabriel, F

    J. Gabriel, F. Pabst, A. Helbling, T. Böhmer, and T. Blochowicz, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 035501 (2018)

    2018

  7. [16]

    Rivera, T

    A. Rivera, T. Blochowicz, C. Gainaru, and E. A. Rössler, Journal of Applied Physics96, 5607 (2004)

    2004

  8. [17]

    Blochowicz, E

    T. Blochowicz, E. Gouirand, S. Schramm, and B. Stühn, J. Chem. Phys.138, 114501 (2013)

    2013

  9. [18]

    Gabriel, T

    J. Gabriel, T. Blochowicz, and B. Stühn, J. Chem. Phys. 142, 104902 (2015)

    2015

  10. [19]

    Pabst, J

    F. Pabst, J. Gabriel, P. Weigl, and T. Blochowicz, Chem. Phys. 494, 103 (2017)

    2017

  11. [20]

    B. J. Berne and R. Pecora, Dynamic Light Scattering (Wiley, New York, 1976)

    1976

  12. [21]

    Neese, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computa- tional Molecular Science2, 73 (2012)

    F. Neese, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computa- tional Molecular Science2, 73 (2012)

    2012

  13. [22]

    Neese, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computa- tional Molecular Science8, e1327 (2018)

    F. Neese, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computa- tional Molecular Science8, e1327 (2018)

    2018

  14. [23]

    L. N. G. Filon, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh49, 38 (1929)

    1929

  15. [24]

    Gabriel, Depolarisierte dynamische Lichtstreuung an Monohydroxy-Alkoholen, Ph.D

    J. Gabriel, Depolarisierte dynamische Lichtstreuung an Monohydroxy-Alkoholen, Ph.D. thesis, Technische Uni- versität (2018)

    2018

  16. [25]

    O. E. Kalinovskaya, J. K. Vij, and G. P. Johari, J. Phys. Chem. A 105, 5061 (2001)

    2001

  17. [26]

    Depolarized dynamic light scattering and dielectric spectroscopy: Two perspectives on molecu- larreorientationinsupercooledliquids,

    J. Gabriel, F. Pabst, A. Helbling, T. Böhmer, and T. Blochowicz, “Depolarized dynamic light scattering and dielectric spectroscopy: Two perspectives on molecu- larreorientationinsupercooledliquids,” in The Scaling of Relaxation Processes, edited by F. Kremer and A. Loidl (Spri...

    2018

  18. [27]

    Blochowicz, C

    T. Blochowicz, C. Tschirwitz, S. Benkhof, and E. A. Rössler, J. Chem. Phys.118, 7544 (2003)

    2003

  19. [28]

    67,1971 (1971)

    G.WilliamsandD.C.Watts,Trans.Farad.Soc. 67,1971 (1971)

    1971

  20. [29]

    J. G. Kirkwood, J. Chem. Phys.7, 911 (1939)

    1939

  21. [30]

    Fröhlich,Theory of Dielectrics(Clarendon Press, Ox- ford, 1958)

    H. Fröhlich,Theory of Dielectrics(Clarendon Press, Ox- ford, 1958)

    1958

  22. [31]

    C. T. Moynihan, A. J. Easteal, M. Ann De Bolt, and J. Tucker, Journal of The American Ceramic Society - J AMER CERAM SOC59, 12 (1976)

    1976

  23. [32]

    Wang, The Journal of Chemical Physics147, 134501 (2017)

    T.Wu, X.Jin, M.K.Saini, Y.D.Liu, K.L.Ngai, andL.- M. Wang, The Journal of Chemical Physics147, 134501 (2017)

    2017

  24. [33]

    Hodge, Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids 169, 211 (1994)

    I. Hodge, Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids 169, 211 (1994)

    1994

  25. [34]

    Onsager, J

    L. Onsager, J. Am. Chem. Soc.58, 1486 (1938)

    1938

  26. [35]

    Fouquet, M

    P.Sillrén, A.Matic, M.Karlsson, M.Koza, M.Maccarini, P. Fouquet, M. Götz, T. Bauer, R. Gulich, P. Lunken- heimer, A. Loidl, J. Mattsson, C. Gainaru, E. Vynokur, S.Schildmann, S.Bauer, andR.Böhmer,J.Chem.Phys. 140, 124501 (2014)

    2014

  27. [36]

    Kashtanov, A

    S. Kashtanov, A. Augustson, J.-E. Rubensson, J. Nord- gren, H. gren, J.-H. Guo, and Y. Luo, Phys. Rev. B71, 104205 (2005)

    2005

  28. [37]

    Diezemann, H

    G. Diezemann, H. Sillescu, G. Hinze, and R. Böhmer, Physical Review E - PHYS REV E57, 4398 (1998)

    1998

  29. [38]

    T. Sato, T. Tsuneda, and K. Hirao, The Journal of chem- ical physics 123, 104307 (2005)

    2005

  30. [39]

    Huth, L.-M

    H. Huth, L.-M. Wang, C. Schick, and R. Richert, J. Chem. Phys. 126, 104503 (2007)

    2007

  31. [40]

    Bauer, K

    S. Bauer, K. Burlafinger, C. Gainaru, P. Lunkenheimer, W. Hiller, A. Loidl, and R. Böhmer, The Journal of Chemical Physics 138, 094505 (2013)

    2013

  32. [41]

    Gainaru, R

    C. Gainaru, R. Meier, S. Schildmann, C. Lederle, W. Hiller, E. A. Rössler, and R. Böhmer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 258303 (2010)

    2010

  33. [42]

    Gainaru, S

    C. Gainaru, S. Kastner, F. Mayr, P. Lunkenheimer, S. Schildmann, H. J. Weber, W. Hiller, A. Loidl, and R. Böhmer, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 118304 (2011)

    2011

  34. [43]

    J. E. Anderson and R. Ullman, J. Chem. Phys.47, 2178 (1967)

    1967

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.