Organometallic and Conjugated Organic Polymers Held Together by Strong Electrostatic Interactions to Form Luminescent Hybrid Materials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The organometallic polymers ([Ag(dmb)(2)]BF(4))(n) (dmb = 1,8-diisocyano-p-menthane) and ([Pt(2)(dppm)(2)(CNC(6)Me(4)NC)](BF(4))(2))(n) (dppm = (Ph(2)P)(2)CH(2), CNC(6)Me(4)NC = 1,4-diisocyano-tetramethylbenzene) were reacted with the conjugated organic polymers of the type (-Cz-C(6)H(4)-)(n) and (-Cz-)(n), where Cz is a 2,7-linked carbazole unit substituted by (CH(2))(3)SO(3)Na or (CH(2))(4)SO(3)Na pendant groups at the N- position, to form polycation/polyanion hybrid materials. These rather insoluble and amorphous (X-ray diffraction) materials were characterized by (1)H and (13)C NMR MAS (magic angle spinning), solid-state IR, and Raman spectroscopy as well as chemical analyses. The hybrids exhibit fluorescence and phosphorescence arising from the polycarbazole units where evidence for a heavy atom effect is provided (Na < Ag < Pt) from the relative enhanced phosphorescence intensity, as well as triplet-triplet energy transfers from the ([Ag(dmb)(2)](+))(n) to the polycarbazole and from the polycarbazole to the ([Pt(2)(dppm)(2)(CNC(6)Me(4)NC)](2+))(n) unit. Evidence for energy transfer in these polymeric materials is provided from time-resolved emission spectroscopy, where the emission band associated with the ([Ag(dmb)(2)](+))(n) is found to be quenched where both the relative intensity and emission lifetime exhibit a large decrease (microsecond to nanosecond time scale).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".