MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041693479 · doi:10.1139/v01-123

Calculations on the electronic structure and nonlinear second-order susceptibilities of fulleropyrrolidinetetrathiafulvalene(C<sub>60</sub>PYTTF) based on donorbridgeacceptor dyads

2001· article· en· W2041693479 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wei Fu, Hong‐Xing Zhang, Ji‐Kang Feng, Wei Li

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicFullerene Chemistry and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsZINDOChemistryTetrathiafulvaleneCrystallographySpectral lineAcceptorElectronic structureCrystal structureStereochemistryComputational chemistryMoleculeCondensed matter physicsOrganic chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The semiempirical INDO calculations were carried out to investigate the charge-transfer interaction and to evaluate the second-order nonlinear susceptibilities for a series of fulleropyrrolidine–tetrathiafulvalene(C60PY–TTF) dyads, C60PY, and C60PY-(CH=CH)n-TTF (n = 0–6). The equilibrium geometries, electronic structures, and UV–vis spectra of these C60PY–TTFs D–B–A dyads were determined by using ZINDO methods. On the basis of electronic spectra, we calculated the β for the dyads using the ZINDO-SOS expression, and found that these dyads have relatively large β. The calculated values of β are 48.78, 62.34, 97.90, 123.24, 183.78, 189.43, 193.45, 195.82 × 10–30 esu for C60PY and C60PY-(CH=CH)n-TTF (n = 0–6), respectively, which shows the enhancing effect when TTF is introduced. The β significantly increases as n increases from 0–3; and it tends to be saturated in the end.Key words: ZINDO-SOS, CI, structure, spectra, C60PY–TTF.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.201
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicFullerene Chemistry and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207