We are doing some voice work for a Japanese scientist. This is an example of the kinds of passages we have to put into words:

Under air conditions, ground-state oxygen molecules (3O2) are degraded by 185 nm UV to (ground-state) atomic oxygen O(3P), which then reacts again with molecular oxygen to generate ozone (O3). The ozone is degraded by 254 nm UV and becomes an excited oxygen molecule (1O2) and an excited oxygen atom (O(1D)). Therefore, continuous generation of AOS is possible through the generation of ROS and O3 by 185 nm UV, and the conversion of O3 to AOS by 254 nm UV. Since both the 1O2 and O(1D) are AOS, strong oxidizability is predictably generated by exposing a target to the AOS.

I am unsure what the conventions would be for verbalizing such substances as:

"ground-state oxygen molecules (3O2)". (Should be superscript "3", then "O', then subscript "2".)
How would a chemist pronounce that? Would he say: "ground-state oxygen molecules, or triplet oxygen"? Or would he say "three-oh-two"?

I have similar questions regarding "excited oxygen molecule (1O2)" and "an excited oxygen atom (O(1D))".

Any help or guidance here would be appreciated.

"How would a chemist pronounce that? "

The triplet ground state of the oxygen molecule.

"excited oxygen molecule (1O2)""

the excited singlet state of the oxygen molecule.

 

""an excited oxygen atom (O(1D))"."

probably "an excited oxygen atom "

Thanks for the help. But more precisely, how would the actual formulae be sounded out after the description? One-Oh-to for 102? What about ""0(1D)"?

The superscripted 3 prefix is sounded as "triplet" and so on.