Bright blue luminescent pyrenyl-containing organosilicon compounds with contrasting charge transport functionality — SiPh<sub>2</sub>(<i>p</i>-C<sub>6</sub>H<sub>4</sub>-pyrenyl)(<i>p</i>-C<sub>6</sub>H<sub>4</sub>-<i>N</i>-benzimidazolyl) and SiPh<sub>2</sub>(<i>p</i>-C<sub>6</sub>H<sub>4</sub>-pyrenyl)[<i>p</i>-C<sub>6</sub>H<sub>4</sub>-NPh(1-naph)]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors investigated the impact of electron-transport and hole-transport functional groups on the properties and the performance of blue luminescent organosilicon compounds as bifunctional materials in organic light-emitting devices. Two new pyrenyl-containing organosilicon compounds, SiPh 2 (p-C 6 H 4 -pyrenyl)(p-C 6 H 4 -N-benzimidazolyl) (1) and SiPh 2 (p-C 6 H 4 -pyrenyl)[p-C 6 H 4 -NPh(1-naph)] (2) were synthesized. Both compounds display bright blue luminescence in solution and in the solid state with a high quantum efficiency, but they have contrasting electroluminescent properties. The presence of the benzimidazolyl group in 1 enables it to function as a bifunctional material (blue emitter and electron transporter) in OLEDs. An efficient triple-layer (CuPc/NPB/1) blue OLED (C.I.E. 0.15, 0.14) was fabricated successfully. The presence of the NPh(1-naph) group in 2 enables its use as an effective transparent hole injection material, but not a blue emitter in OLEDs.Key words: organosilicon compounds, synthesis, luminescence, electroluminescence, devices.
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 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 | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.015 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.023 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".