Synthesis and Characterization of Alternating Copolymers of Fluorene and Oxadiazole
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alternating copolymers of 9,9-dioctylfluorene and oxadiazole have been prepared by the tetrazole route or the Suzuki coupling reaction. In the polymers the oxadiazole units were evenly dispersed in the main chain at every one, P(F 1 - alt -Ox), three, P(F 3 - alt -Ox), or four, P(F 4 - alt -Ox), fluorene units. Another copolymer with an asymmetric repeat unit structure, P(F 3 −Ox−F 1 −Ox) has also been prepared for comparison. In this study, the tetrazole route has been demonstrated to offer several advantages for preparing polyoxadiazole with well-defined structures compared to other oxadiazole ring formation reactions. These advantages include: clean and fast reactions, mild reaction conditions, high yields, and high molecular masses of product. The glass transition temperature of copolymers ranged from 98 to 150 °C, and the copolymers show high thermal stability with decomposition temperatures around 430 °C. The UV−vis absorption and photoluminescence properties of all the copolymers in solutions are similar to those of poly(9,9-dioctylfluorene). All copolymers fluoresce in the blue-light range with quantum yields of ∼70% in CH 2 Cl 2 solution.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".