MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029278209 · doi:10.1021/ma0006934

Structure and Segmental Motions in Symmetrically Substituted Poly(ferrocenylsilanes): A Carbon-13 CPMAS NMR Contact Time Study

2001· article· en· W2029278209 on OpenAlexaff
J. Rasburn, Fazila Seker, Kevin Kulbaba, P. G. Klein, Ian Manners, G. Julius Vancsó, Peter M. Macdonald

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecules · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced NMR Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDimethylsilaneChemistryDifferential scanning calorimetryPolymerChemical shiftCarbon-13 NMRCrystallographyAtmospheric temperature rangeAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Physical chemistryPolymer chemistryStereochemistryOrganic chemistryThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The structure and thermal behavior of two organometallic polymers, poly(ferrocenyl dimethylsilane) ( I ) and poly(ferrocenyl di- n -butylsilane) ( II ), have been examined using a variety of physical characterization methods which reveal differences in their crystalline structures and associated segmental librations. In addition to examination with differential scanning calorimetry and wide-angle X-ray scattering, solid-state 13 C NMR spectra were acquired for a wide range of 1 H− 13 C contact times. The spectra of I at room temperature exhibit two isotropic chemical shifts for the methyl groups, indicating the presence of different environments. The initial cross-polarization (CP) times of crystalline, protonated carbons are interpreted with reference to values found in the literature. The main chains of both polymers were found to be fairly rigid on the time scale of T CH, but the side chains of II are very disordered. The relevance of the 13 C measurements at room temperature is discussed with regard to a higher temperature transition indicated in the DSC trace of II .

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.891

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacromoleculesSame topicAdvanced NMR Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207