Comparative Study on Tetrahedral and Tripodal Luminescent Silane and Methane Compounds with a 2,2‘-Dipyridylamino Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A comparative study on methane and silane derivatives that contain either one or four 2,2‘-dipyridylamino group (dpa) functionalized groups has been carried out. Six new compounds, ( p- dpa-phenyl)triphenylsilane ( 1 ), ( p- dpa-phenyl)triphenylmethane ( 2 ), tetra( p- dpa-phenyl)silane ( 3 ), tetra( p- dpa-phenyl)methane ( 4 ), tetra( p- dpa-biphenyl)silane ( 5 ), and tetra( p- dpa-biphenyl)methane ( 6 ), have been synthesized using Suzuki coupling, Ullmann condensation methods, or simple substitution reactions. The structures of 3 and 4 have been determined by X-ray diffraction analyses. Thermal and luminescent properties have been investigated, which revealed that these new compounds are luminescent in the violet−blue region and the methane derivatives in general have a higher thermal stability than the corresponding silane analogues. The electronic properties of the new compounds were investigated experimentally and theoretically by molecular orbital calculations, which revealed that there is a subtle difference between the methane derivatives and their silane analogues.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".