Solid-State Synthesis of a Conducting Polythiophene via an Unprecedented Heterocyclic Coupling Reaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prolonged storage ( approximately 2 years) or gentle heating (50-80 degrees C) of crystalline 2,5-dibromo-3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene (DBEDOT) affords a highly conducting, bromine-doped poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) (PEDOT), as confirmed by solid-state NMR, FTIR, CV, and vis-NIR spectroscopies. The novel solid-state polymerization (SSP) does not occur for 2,5-dichloro-3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene (DCEDOT), and requires a much higher temperature (>130 degrees C) for 2,5-diiodo-3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene (DIEDOT). X-ray structural analysis of the above dihalothiophenes reveals short Hal.Hal distances between adjacent molecules in DBEDOT and DIEDOT, but not in DCEDOT. The polymerization may also occur in the melt but is significantly slower and leads to poorly conductive material. Detailed studies of the reaction were performed using ESR, DSC, microscopy, and gravimetric analyses. SSP starts on crystal defect sites; it is exothermic by 14 kcal/mol and requires activation energy of approximately 26 kcal/mol (for DBEDOT). The temperature dependence of the conductivity of SSP-PEDOT (sigma(rt) = 20-80 S/cm) reveals a slight thermal activation. It can be further increased by a factor of 2 by doping with iodine. Using this approach, thin films of PEDOT with conductivity as high as 20 S/cm were fabricated on insulating flexible plastic surfaces.
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".