MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040129869 · doi:10.1021/ja809631r

Impact of Metallophilicity on “Colossal” Positive and Negative Thermal Expansion in a Series of Isostructural Dicyanometallate Coordination Polymers

2009· article· en· W2040129869 on OpenAlexaff
Jasmine L. Korčok, Michael J. Katz, Daniel B. Leznoff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Chemical Society · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicThermal Expansion and Ionic Conductivity
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsostructuralChemistrySeries (stratigraphy)Negative thermal expansionPolymerThermalThermal expansionCrystallographyThermodynamicsOrganic chemistryCrystal structurePhysicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Five isostructural dicyanometallate coordination polymers containing metallophilic interactions (In[M(CN)(2)](3) (M = Ag, Au), KCd[M(CN)(2)](3), and KNi[Au(CN)(2)](3)) were synthesized and investigated by variable-temperature powder X-ray diffraction to probe their thermal expansion properties. The compounds have a trigonal unit cell and show positive thermal expansion (PTE) in the ab plane, where Kagome sheets of M atoms reside, and negative thermal expansion (NTE) along the trigonal c axis, perpendicular to these sheets. The magnitude of thermal expansion is unusually large in all cases (40 x 10(-6) K(-1) < |alpha| < 110 x 10(-6) K(-1)). The system with the weakest metallophilic interactions, In[Ag(CN)(2)](3), shows the most "colossal" thermal expansion of the series (alpha(a) = 105(2) x 10(-6) K(-1), alpha(c) = -84(2) x 10(-6) K(-1) at 295 K), while systems containing stronger Au-Au interactions show relatively reduced thermal expansion. Thus, it appears that strong metallophilic interactions hinder colossal thermal expansion behavior. Additionally, the presence of K(+) counterions also reduces the magnitude of thermal expansion.

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)0.000
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations123
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Chemical SocietySame topicThermal Expansion and Ionic ConductivityFrench-language works237,207