The Orientation Parameter for Energy Transfer in Restricted Geometries Including Block Copolymer Interfaces: A Monte Carlo Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe Monte Carlo simulations of resonance energy transfer (RET) experiments for immobile donor (D) and acceptor (A) dyes confined to planar, cylindrical, and spherical restricted geometries. We compare values of the quantum efficiency (PhiET) evaluated through consideration of individual donor-acceptor pairs, with values calculated assuming a pre-averaged value of the orientation parameter /kappa/2 = 0.476 appropriate for infinite three dimensional (3D) space. For dyes confined to restricted geometries where the length scale of the confining dimension is less than or equal to the Förster radius R0, the coupling of the orientation parameter and the donor-acceptor distance becomes noticeable. Values of Phi(ET) obtained by proper consideration of the orientation parameter are smaller than those calculated using /kappa/2 = 0.476. We use this Monte Carlo method to reanalyze the fluoresce decay measured from dye-labeled poly(isoprene-b-methyl methacrylate) diblock copolymer with lamellar structure,(1) from which the interface thickness for PI-PMMA lamella can be retrieved. We found the retrieved interface thickness is sensitive to the choice of dipole orientation. If all dipoles in the confined polymer interface have a random orientation, the value of interface thickness was found to be 0.9 +/- 0.2 nm through consideration of individual dipole orientations. Assumption of /kappa/2 = 0.476 in the FRET calculations leads to a larger value of interface thickness (1.3 +/- 0.2 nm) due to the neglect of the coupling between dipole orientation and D-A distance for the dyes confined to lamellar interfaces.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".