Theoretical studies on the one- and two-photon absorption of tetrabenzoporphyrins and phthalocyanines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The one-photon absorption (OPA) properties of tetrabenzoporphyrins (TBPs) and phthalocyanines (Pcs) were studied using the semiempirical ZINDO method and time-dependent density functional theory (TDDFT), respectively. The compared results confirmed that the semiempirical ZINDO method was reasonably reliable when calculating the OPA of tetrabenzoporphyrins and phthalocyanines. On the basis of the OPA properties obtained from the ZINDO method, two-photon absorption (TPA) properties of two series of molecules were investigated, using ZINDO and sum-over-states (SOS) methods. The results showed that the TPA cross-sections of all molecules were in the range of 220.6 × 1050 345.9 × 1050 cm4·s·photon1, which were in the same order of magnitude as the values reported in the literature. The relatively larger δ(ω) value for Pcs with respect to that for corresponding TBPs originates from larger intramolecular charge transfer, which can be characterized by the difference of dipole moment between S0 and S1 and the transition dipole moment between S1 and S5.Key words: two-photon absorption, ZINDO, sum-over-states, tetrabenzoporphyrin, phthalocyanines.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".