MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316792283 · doi:10.1021/ic400478d

Mono- and Dinuclear Cationic Iridium(III) Complexes Bearing a 2,5-Dipyridylpyrazine (2,5-dpp) Ligand

2013· article· en· W2316792283 on OpenAlexaff
Loïc Donato, Catherine E. McCusker, Felix N. Castellano, Eli Zysman‐Colman

Bibliographic record

VenueInorganic Chemistry · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOrganic Light-Emitting Diodes Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIridiumChemistryCationic polymerizationExcited stateLigand (biochemistry)LuminescenceElectrochemistryDensity functional theoryPhotochemistryPhotoluminescenceCrystallographyPhysical chemistryPolymer chemistryComputational chemistryElectrodeCatalysisOrganic chemistryMaterials scienceAtomic physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The synthesis, X-ray structures, photophysical, and electrochemical characterization of mono- (1) and dinuclear (2) cationic iridium(III) complexes bearing a 2,5-dipyridylpyrazine (2,5-dpp) ancillary ligand are reported. Upon the complexation of a first equivalent of iridium, the photoluminescence shifts markedly into the deep red (λem = 710 nm, ΦPL = 0.9%) compared to other cationic iridium complexes such as [Ir(ppy)2(bpy)]PF6. With the coordination of a second equivalent of iridium, room temperature luminescence is completely quenched. Both 1 and 2 are luminescent at low temperatures but with distinct excited state decay kinetics; the emission of 2 is significantly red-shifted compared to 1. Emission both at 298 and 77 K results from a mixed charge-transfer state. Density functional theory (DFT) calculations and electrochemical behavior point to an electronic communication between the two iridium complexes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations72
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInorganic ChemistrySame topicOrganic Light-Emitting Diodes ResearchFrench-language works237,207