Effect of CdS shell thickness on the optical properties of water-soluble, amphiphilic polymer-encapsulated PbS/CdS core/shell quantum dots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cation exchange, recently explored for synthesizing core/shell quantum dots (QDs), causes continuous core size change during shell formation. By carefully varying parent PbS QD size and cation exchange conditions, we have synthesized PbS/CdS core/shell QDs with a similar PbS core size of ∼4.5 nm yet a different CdS shell thickness. This enables us to study the effect of shell thickness on the properties of PbS QDs after their transfer from chloroform into watervia poly(maleic anhydride-alt-1-octadecene-co-poly(ethylene glycol)). It was found that the quantum yield (QY) of PbS cores in water firstly increases with shell thickness up to ∼0.7 nm, reaching 33%, owing to better surface passivation and then decreases to 1.7% when the shell thickness reaches 2.3 nm. Such decline is due to the formation of new defects with shell deposition. In contrast, the variation amplitude of QY during water transfer monotonically decreases and QD photostability monotonically improves with shell thickness. It is clear that although newly introduced defects play a fundamental role in the absolute QY, they do not show any overwhelmingly negative effects on the variation of QY with environments and photostability. The colloidal stability of QDs in buffers containing different salt concentrations seems to be not affected by the shell thickness, possibly due to the same steric stabilization effect of the amphiphilic polymer in all samples. Further investigation on a series of core/shell samples confirms that ∼0.7 nm is an optimal shell thickness for various core sizes investigated herein, consistently yielding the maximum QY and reasonably good photostability.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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".