MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2372879405 · doi:10.1149/ma2016-01/42/2103

(Invited) Adventures in Si Nanocrystal Surface Chemistry....Controlling Optical Properties and so Much More

2016· article· en· W2372879405 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan G. C. Veinot

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSilicon Nanostructures and Photoluminescence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrosilylationNanotechnologySurface modificationMaterials scienceSiliconPolymerChemistryCatalysisOptoelectronicsOrganic chemistryPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Silicon nanocrystals (SiNCs) have been attracting attention as active materials in a variety of proto-type devices including, solar cells, light-emitting diodes, and photodetectors. These, and other device structures require well-defined materials with predictable properties. Traditionally SiNC surfaces are rendered processable and stable toward oxidation by employing a variations of the general hydrosilylation reaction; they all involve the addition of a silicon-hydride bond in the SiNC surface across a carbon-carbon double (or triple) bond and affords a “monolayer” attached through a robust silicon-carbon linkage. Recently, it has come to light that typical hydrosilylation conditions can afford insulating multilayers that can render SiNCs electrically inactive. This finding led us to explore alternative functionalization protocols. In doing so, we discovered that surface chemistry provides another degree of freedom with which SiNC properties may be tailored. For example, it can be used to tailor the photoluminescent response throughout the visible spectrum, used to prepare SiNC/polymer hybrids, and even induce reactivity that provides polymerization of workhorse electronic polymers without the use of expensive transition metal catalysts. This presentation will include a discussion of our recent exploration into SiNC surface chemistry, new reactive platforms that have opened the door to new functional materials, and what our discoveries mean for the future of these fascinating materials.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.009

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicSilicon Nanostructures and PhotoluminescenceFrench-language works237,207