Luminescence studies of copper(I)-containing [2]pseudorotaxanes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report describes photoluminescence studies of copper-containing [2]pseudorotaxanes that mimic elements of functioning molecular machines. Excitation with visible light induces a formal oxidation of the metal center and simulates an actuation process. In all four [2]pseudorotaxanes studied, the ring ligand is the same, but the thread ligand is variable, namely 2,9-di(anisol-4-yl)-1,10-phenanthroline (dap), 6,6′-di(anisol-4-yl)-2,2′-bipyridine (o-dabipy), 5,5′-di(anisol-4-yl)-2,2′-bipyridine (m-dabipy), or 8,8′-di(anisol-4-yl)-3,3′-bi-isoquinoline (dabiiq). The absorbance bandshapes suggest that aryl substituents extending from the core ligands engage in stacking interactions and induce a partially flattened structure in the ground state. More severe flattening occurs in the excited state and precludes the observation of emission if inter-ligand steric forces do not limit the distortion. Thus, the [2]pseudorotaxanes containing dap or o-dabipy as the thread ligand exhibit uncorrected emission maxima at around 720 nm in room-temperature dichloromethane, while the less constrained analogues, containing dabiiq or m-dabipy, are not emissive in fluid solution and barely exhibit a signal in rigid media. In dichloromethane, the luminescence quantum yields of the dap- and o-dabipy-containing systems are 6 × 10−4 and 4 × 10−4, and the excited-state lifetimes are 98 ns and 90 ns, respectively.
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 | 0.001 | 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".