MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044109102 · doi:10.1021/ma061901g

Anthryl-Based Poly(phenylene ethynylene)s:  Tuning Optical Properties with Diels−Alder Reactions

2006· article· en· W2044109102 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Éléna Ishow, Jean Bouffard, Youngmi Kim, Timothy M. Swager

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecules · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicLuminescence and Fluorescent Materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsMaleimidePolymerizationPolymerConjugated systemPolymer chemistryPhenyleneReactivity (psychology)Diels–Alder reactionHypsochromic shiftSonogashira couplingQuantum yieldPhotochemistryMaterials scienceChemistryOrganic chemistryFluorescencePalladiumCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soluble anthryl-based conjugated poly(phenylene ethynylene)s (PPEs) have been synthesized using palladium-catalyzed Sonogashira−Hagihara cross-coupling polymerization reactions. Molecular weights up to 3.5 × 10 4 g·mol -1 were obtained, making them suitable for spectroscopic solution characterizations and thin film processing. The selective reactivity of these polymers as multidienes has been successfully demonstrated with strong dienophiles. Diels−Alder reactions proceed cleanly to completion with unhindered dienophiles such as N -alkylated maleimide derivatives. TGA analysis revealed thermal retro-Diels−Alder reactions at modest temperatures around 210 °C. Compared with their parent polymers, the cycloadduct polymers exhibited dramatic hypsochromic shifts of their emission and absorption maxima up to 80 nm along with a considerable quantum yield enhancement. These original anthryl-based polymers appear attractive as reactive conjugated materials whose optical properties can easily be tuned with quantitative Diels−Alder reactions.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.833

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations21
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacromoleculesSame topicLuminescence and Fluorescent MaterialsFrench-language works237,207