Theoretical studies on the absorption and luminescent properties of a series of derivatives of 1,3-diphenyl-5-pyrene-2-yl-4,5-dihydro-1<i>H</i>-pyrazole
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The absorption and emission spectra for a series of substituted 1,3-diphenyl-5-pyrene-2-yl-4,5-dihydro-1H-pyrazole (DPPyP) molecules are computed by TDDFT methods. The solvent effect is modeled using the self-consistent reaction field (SCRF) method with Tomasi's polarized continuum model (PCM). The ground-state geometries were optimized by the HartreeFock method with the 6-31G basis set (and also with 3-21G* for molecule A) (HF/6-31G), and the lowest singlet excited-state geometries were optimized at the ab initio CIS level with the 6-31G basis set (CIS/6-31G). The calculated results indicate that the TDDFT method can reproduce the experimental values. We consider the effects of different basis sets on the optimization of the ground-state geometries. Specially, some insights on the differences observed for these compounds in changing the substituted donors (H, CH3, and NH2) and acceptor group (CN) are given; the results indicate that introduction of the donor groups will lead emission to be red-shifted, while introduction of the acceptor will induce the emission to be blue-shifted, which provides useful information for modulating light-emitting material colors.Key words: absorption and emission, TDDFT, CIS, SCRFPCM.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".