MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046189081 · doi:10.1021/jp0631580

Photoelectrochemistry of Conducting Polymers Modified with Electron-Acceptor Moieties

2006· article· en· W2046189081 on OpenAlexafffund
О. А. Семенихин, Motasser M. D. Hossain, Mark S. Workentin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry B · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicConducting polymers and applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhotoelectrochemistryElectron acceptorElectronAcceptorPolymerMaterials scienceChemistryNanotechnologyPhotochemistryCombinatorial chemistryOrganic chemistryElectrochemistryPhysicsPhysical chemistryElectrodeCondensed matter physicsNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The photoelectrochemical behavior of two polymers of the polythiophene series containing electron-acceptor groups in the main chain was studied and compared to that of the nonmodified polymer, poly(2,2'-bithiophene), PBT. The acceptor groups were 2,2'-bipyridine and biphenyl, which are electron-deficient as compared to the bithiophene unit. All three polymers demonstrated a pronounced photovoltaic effect, which for PBT was consistent with data reported earlier. The introduction of the electron-acceptor moieties was found to significantly enhance the magnitude of the steady-state photocurrent as well as to drastically alter the dependencies of the photocurrent on the polymer film thickness and the external bias. These observations indicated that the mechanism of photocurrent generation in the modified polymers differs from that in nonmodified polymer and involves the electron transfer to the electron-acceptor moieties in the polymer main chain. The values of the external quantum efficiency were estimated in a liquid-cell arrangement to be 0.27 and 0.19% for modified and nonmodified polymers, respectively.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations18
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry BSame topicConducting polymers and applicationsFrench-language works237,207