MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2559118413 · doi:10.1021/jacs.6b10707

Studies on a “Disappearing Polymorph”: Thermal and Magnetic Characterization of α-<i>p</i>-NCC<sub>6</sub>F<sub>4</sub>CNSSN<sup>•</sup>

2016· article· en· W2559118413 on OpenAlexafffund
Yassine Beldjoudi, Ana Arauzo, Fernando Palacio, Melanie Pilkington, Jeremy M. Rawson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Chemical Society · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicInorganic Chemistry and Materials
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityUniversity of Windsor
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGobierno de AragónCanada Research ChairsUniversity of CambridgeMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsChemistryCharacterization (materials science)ThermalCrystallographyNanotechnologyThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The α-and β-phases of the thiazyl radical p -NCC 6 F 4 CNSSN • ( 1 ) can be selectively prepared by careful control of the sublimation conditions, with the α-phase crystallizing preferentially when the substrate temperature is maintained below −10 °C, whereas the β-phase is isolated when the substrate temperature is maintained at or above ambient temperature. Differential scanning calorimatry studies reveal that the α-phase converts to the β-phase upon warming over the range 111–117 °C (Δ H = +4 kJ·mol –1 ) via a melt–recrystallization process, with the β-phase itself melting at 167–170 °C (Δ H fus = 27 kJ·mol –1 ). IR and Raman spectroscopy can be used to clearly discriminate between 1α and 1β . The α-phase shows a broad maximum in the magnetic susceptibility around 8 K that, coupled with a broad maximum in the heat capacity, is indicative of short-range order. Some field dependence of the susceptibility below 3 K is observed, but the lack of features in the ac susceptibility, M vs H plots, or heat capacity mitigates against long-range order in 1α .

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 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.776

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.209 · 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.

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

Citations27
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Chemical SocietySame topicInorganic Chemistry and MaterialsFrench-language works237,207