Self-Assembly of Russian Doll Concentric Porphyrin Nanorings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electronic communication between concentric macrocycles with wave functions that extend around their circumferences can lead to remarkable behavior, as illustrated by multiwalled carbon nanotubes and photosynthetic chlorophyll arrays. However, it is difficult to hold one π-conjugated molecular ring inside another. Here, we show that ring-in-ring complexes, consisting of a 6-porphyrin ring locked inside a 12-porphyrin ring, can be assembled by placing different metals in the two rings (zinc and aluminum). A bridging ligand with carboxylate and imidazole binding sites forms spokes between the two rings, resulting in a highly cooperative supramolecular self-assembly process. Excitation is transferred from the inner 6-ring to the outer 12-ring of this Russian doll complex within 40 ps. These complexes lead to a form of template-directed synthesis in which one nanoring promotes formation of a larger concentric homologous ring; here, the effective template is an eight-component noncovalent assembly. Russian doll templating provides a new approach to amplifying the size of a covalent nanostructure.
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".