MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984563167 · doi:10.1021/jp0480504

Variation of Fluorescence Lifetimes and Judd-Ofelt Parameters between Eu<sup>3+</sup> Doped Bulk and Nanocrystalline Cubic Lu<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub>

2004· article· en· W1984563167 on OpenAlexaff
John‐Christopher Boyer, Fiorenzo Vetrone, John A. Capobianco, Adolfo Speghini, Marco Bettinelli

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry B · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicLuminescence Properties of Advanced Materials
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanocrystalline materialMaterials scienceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)EuropiumDopantDopingExcited stateNanocrystalLuminescenceEmission spectrumOscillator strengthSpectral lineAtomic physicsChemistryNanotechnologyPhysicsOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The luminescent properties of 1 mol % Eu 3+ -doped cubic Lu 2 O 3 nanocrystals prepared by a combustion synthesis route were investigated. The visible emission spectrum of the europium doped Lu 2 O 3 nanocrystals indicate that the structural environment surrounding the dopant Eu 3+ ion is distorted when compared to a bulk sample with a micrometer particle size. From the resulting emission spectra, the Ω 2 and Ω 4 Judd-Ofelt intensity parameters were calculated. The lifetimes of the 5 D 0 excited state for both the C 2 and C 3i sites were found to be nearly double that found for a similarly doped sample with larger particle size (bulk sample). This behavior is attributed to a change in the refractive index of the nanocrystalline material that in turn modifies the oscillator strength of the 4f ↔ 4f transitions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.223
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations251
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry BSame topicLuminescence Properties of Advanced MaterialsFrench-language works237,207