MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314101754 · doi:10.1021/ic001369s

High-Resolution Luminescence and Absorption Spectroscopy of Cs<sub>2</sub>GeF<sub>6</sub>:Os<sup>4+</sup>

2001· article· en· W2314101754 on OpenAlexaff
Markus Wermuth, Christian Reber, Hans U. Güdel

Bibliographic record

VenueInorganic Chemistry · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicInorganic Fluorides and Related Compounds
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryLuminescenceExcited stateChromophoreAbsorption spectroscopyGround stateVibronic spectroscopyAtomic physicsSpectroscopyVibronic couplingIonPhotochemistryPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The luminescence spectrum of the Os4+ dopant ion occupying O(h) sites of the Cs2GeF6 host shows three sets of resolved transitions in the near-infrared at approximately 12000, 9000, and 6700 cm(-1), corresponding to intraconfigurational transitions between the 1T2g lowest excited electronic state and the Gamma1, Gamma4, and Gamma5/Gamma3 spinor levels of the 3T1g ground state, respectively. The octahedral OsF6(2-) chromophore does not emit from higher excited states, in contrast to related chloride and bromide host lattices, where several excited states show luminescence. The highly resolved single-crystal luminescence and absorption spectra are rationalized with ligand field parameters 10 Dq = 24570 cm(-1), B = 500 cm(-1), C = 2380 cm(-1), zeta = 3000 cm(-1). Transition intensities reveal an intermediate coupling situation for OsF6(2-): Whereas they generally follow the selection rules derived in the L-S coupling scheme, additional information can be gained from the j-j coupling limit. The resolved vibronic structure allows the identification of the most efficient ungerade parity enabling modes (vibronic origins) and shows that progressions along the a1g, e(g), and t2g modes occur for some transitions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInorganic ChemistrySame topicInorganic Fluorides and Related CompoundsFrench-language works237,207