Band‐gap engineering of polythiophenes via dithienophosphole doping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A series of polythiophenes doped with dithieno[3,2‐b:2′,3′‐d]phosphole units at varying levels (0–17%) were synthesized and characterized. Polymer work up provided two series of polymers from chloroform (C) and hexanes (H) for each doping level, respectively. Systematic structure–property studies revealed that the C‐series polymers generally had higher molecular weights than the H‐series, but also slightly higher relative dithienophosphole concentrations, both having a significant impact on the photophysical and electrochemical properties of the polymers. Furthermore, the presence of the dithienophosphole units also stabilizes the LUMO levels, whereas the HOMO levels remain dominated by the thiophene units, resulting in desirable electronics for an interaction with acceptor materials, such as 1‐(3‐methoxycarbonyl)propyl‐1‐phenyl[6,6]C61. Importantly, increasing amount of dithienophosphole doping results in increased conductivities for the polymers in their oxidized state, while concurrently significantly stabilizing the neutral polythiophenes toward oxidation under environmental conditions. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Polym Sci Part A: Polym Chem, 2011
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".