Luminescence and Magnetic Properties of Tb(<scp>III</scp>) Complexes with <scp>TETA</scp> and Synergistic Effect by 1,10‐Phenanthroline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two Tb(III) complexes, [Tb(TETA)]− and [Tb(TETA)(phen)]− (TETA = 1,4,8,11‐tetraazacyclotetradecane‐1,4,8,11‐tetraacetate and phen = 1,10‐phenanthroline), were synthesized and their luminescence ( 5D4 → 7F J =0–6 transitions) and magnetic properties were examined. The photoluminescence (PL) quantum yield of [Tb(TETA)(phen)]− (Q = 0.47) was significantly higher than that of [Tb(TETA)]− (Q = 0.006). The dramatic increase (78×) in green luminescence was attributed to intramolecular energy transfer from phen to Tb(III). The energy transfer rate according to Dexter theory was found to be approximately 1011 s−1. The temperature dependence of the molar susceptibilities confirmed that the two complexes behave as paramagnets obeying the Curie–Weiss law. In addition, the field‐dependent magnetization of the two complexes measured in the −70 to + 70 kOe range at T = 1.8 K fitted well with the Brillouin function with the following values: g eff = 1.5, μ B = 9.27 × 10−21 emu, and J = 6. These results provide new insights into the development of lanthanide metal complexes with tetraaza © 2016 Korean Chemical Society, Seoul & Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheimmacrocyclic ligands.
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".