MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057221559 · doi:10.1002/adfm.200600142

Dispersible Tm<sup>3+</sup>‐Doped Nanoparticles that Exhibit Strong 1.47 μm Photoluminescence

2007· article· en· W2057221559 on OpenAlexaff
P.R. Diamente, Mati Raudsepp, Frank C. J. M. van Veggel

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Functional Materials · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicLuminescence Properties of Advanced Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials sciencePhotoluminescenceQuantum yieldNanoparticleLuminescenceThuliumAnalytical Chemistry (journal)DopingYield (engineering)Crystal (programming language)NanotechnologyFluorescenceOptoelectronicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A general procedure is described for the synthesis and conversion of dispersible core/shell LaF 3 :Tm/LaF 3 nanoparticles to highly dispersible thulium‐doped lanthanum disilicate nanoparticles (La 2 Si 2 O 7 :Tm) with an average diameter of 7 nm that show emission at a wavelength of 1.47 μm. Measurement of the citrate‐stabilized precursor nanoparticles in a KBr pellet shows a 1.47 μm emission with an effective lifetime of only 3 μs and an estimated quantum yield of ≪ 1 %. However, significant improvements to the emission properties are obtained by forming a ca. 1 nm thick silica shell around the nanoparticles via a modified Stöber method, followed by baking at 900 °C for 12 h to convert the LaF 3 matrix to La 2 Si 2 O 7 . Excitation with a 785 nm continuous wave (CW) diode laser results in the luminescence of the 3 H 4 – 3 F 4 transition at 1.47 μm with an effective lifetime of 56 μs and an estimated quantum yield of 4 %. High‐resolution measurements at 77 K are carried out in order to improve the resolution of the crystal‐field splitting observed from the 3 H 4 level.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0020.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations106
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Functional MaterialsSame topicLuminescence Properties of Advanced MaterialsFrench-language works237,207