MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1583942037 · doi:10.1002/mrc.4107

Proton and deuterium nuclear spin relaxation study of the SmA and SmC* phases of BP8Cl‐d<sub>17</sub>: a self‐consistent analysis

2014· article· en· W1583942037 on OpenAlexaff
A. Ferraz, J. Zhang, Pedro J. Sebastião, A. C. Ribeiro, Ronald Y. Dong

Bibliographic record

VenueMagnetic Resonance in Chemistry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicLiquid Crystal Research Advancements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeuteriumChemistryRelaxation (psychology)ProtonSpin–lattice relaxationProton spin crisisSpin diffusionLarmor precessionDeuterium NMRSpin–spin relaxationLiquid crystalNuclear magnetic resonanceSpin (aerodynamics)Condensed matter physicsDiffusionAtomic physicsThermodynamicsMagnetic fieldNuclear physicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A self-consistent analysis of proton and deuterium nuclear spin relaxation times in the smectic phases of a partially deuterated smectogen is presented here. Proton spin-lattice relaxation times T(1Z) were measured as a function of Larmor frequency over a range of 1 kHz to 300 MHz at selected temperatures. Deuterium spin relaxation times T(1Z) and T(1Q) were measured as a function of temperature at two different magnetic fields in the smectic A phase. The deuterium data provide dynamic parameters such as rotational diffusion constants and internal jump rates as well as the nematic order parameter S. The proton data are analyzed using a number of relaxation mechanisms, one of which is the molecular reorientation. It is found helpful in these latter analyses to use the nematic order parameter and to fix the contribution from molecular reorientations determined by the deuterium spin relaxation. The fits to the proton T(1) frequency and temperature dispersions by the remaining relaxation mechanisms such as layer undulations and translational self-diffusion will be discussed for the smectic A and chiral smectic C phases.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMagnetic Resonance in ChemistrySame topicLiquid Crystal Research AdvancementsFrench-language works237,207