Gold−Sulfur Bonding in 2D and 3D Self-Assembled Monolayers: XPS Characterization
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although self-assembled monolayers (SAMs) of alkylthiols on planar gold (2D SAMs) and on gold nanoparticles (3D SAMs) have been intensely studied, the actual nature of the Au−S bonding remains poorly characterized. Comparison of the X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) spectra of 2D and 3D SAMs and “reference” Au(I) complexes, sometimes referred to as Au(I) thiolate polymers, provides detailed insight into this problem. We report high-resolution XPS spectra and Au 4f 7/2 and S 2p 3/2 binding energies (BE) in 2D SAMs, 3D SAMs and the Au(I) thiolate complexes for two short-chain thiols ( n -C 4 SH and n -C 5 SH). Sulfur 2p 3/2 BE shifts are used to compare the different states of bonding in the SAM systems and the Au(I) complexes and establish that the S atom in the SAM systems bears a charge of about 0.2 e . The 2D and 3D SAMs exhibit similar XPS characteristics and are both distinguishable from the Au(I) complexes. The origins of the observed BE values are discussed in the context of the nature of the gold substrate and the oxidation state of the chemisorbed sulfur atom. Comparison of 13 C NMR chemical shift data and XPS BE data further clarifies the nature of the surface interactions as well as the use of the Au(I) complexes as reference materials.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it