Control of thermochromic behaviour in crystal violet lactone (CVL)/alkyl gallate/alcohol ternary mixtures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three-component thermochromic mixtures generally consist of a leuco dye, a phenolic colour developer, and a high-melting organic solvent (listed in order of increasing mass). Their colouring behaviour is controlled by competing binary interactions, with the dye–developer interaction responsible for colour formation and the developer–solvent interaction responsible for solid-state colour erasure. In the present study, the reversible thermochromic properties of twelve systems of three-component mixtures comprising crystal violet lactone (CVL, dye), one of four alkyl gallates (developer), and one of three long-chain alkyl alcohols (solvent) were examined, as bulk samples, with slow heating and cooling rates. The thermochromic behaviour (i.e., melt-lightened vs melt-darkened thermochromism) of these mixtures was examined as a function of the difference in length of the alkyl chains attached to the developer and solvent. When the alkyl chain lengths were well-matched, the developer–solvent interaction dominated in the solid state and melt-darkened thermochromism was observed. When the alkyl chain lengths were poorly matched, the dye–developer interaction dominated in the solid state, and melt-lightened thermochromism was observed. Ternary thermochromic phase diagrams define compositional regions of optimal thermochromic behaviour (i.e., demonstrating high colour contrast), showing the intricate balance between developer–dye and developer–solvent interactions, and component concentration, in determining thermochromic behaviour.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".