Optimization of a Safranine O three-component photoinitiating system for use in holographic recording
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The coupling between a holographic resin, combining multiple monomers and additives, with photoinitiating systems (PIS) is not straightforward. In this paper, a classic PIS based on Safranine O (SFH + ) as dye, an amine (ethyl-4-(dimethylamino)benzoate) as electron donor, and a triazine derivative (2-(4-methoxyphenyl)-4,6-bis(trichloromethyl)-1,3,5-triazine) as electron acceptor for holographic recording was studied using time-resolved spectroscopic experiments. By taking into account the viscosity of the matrix, a method to evaluate the overall quantum yield of radicals released is proposed and the contribution of singlet and triplet excited states of SFH + in the formation of radicals is evaluated. Then the corresponding photopolymerization efficiencies of the PIS, studied by real-time FTIR, are compared with holographic recording experiments: this system allows the formation of a hologram with high diffraction efficiency (0.9) in 3 s of irradiation time. It is shown that besides holographic resin formulation, the photochemistry of PIS also impacts the hologram formation.
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) | 0.001 | 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".