MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588077699 · doi:10.1107/s2056989017002213

Crystal structure and solvent-dependent behaviours of 3-amino-1,6-diethyl-2,5,7-trimethyl-4,4-diphenyl-3a,4a-diaza-4-bora-<i>s</i>-indacene

2017· article· en· W2588077699 on OpenAlexafffund
Lijing Yang, Brett Drew, Ravi Shekar Yalagala, R. Chaviwala, Razvan Simionescu, Alan J. Lough, Hongbin Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Crystallographica Section E Crystallographic Communications · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicLuminescence and Fluorescent Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoBrock University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryChloroformDihedral angleBODIPYSolventCrystal structureMoleculeDichloromethaneCrystallographyDimethyl sulfoxideToluenePhotochemistryFluorescenceProton NMRHydrogen bondStereochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the title compound (3-amino-4,4-diphenyl-BODIPY), C 28 H 32 BN 3 , the central six-membered ring has a flattened sofa conformation, with one of the N atoms deviating by 0.142 (4) Å from the mean plane of the other five atoms, which have an r.m.s. deviation of 0.015 Å. The dihedral angle between the two essentially planar outer five-membered rings is 8.0 (2)°. In the crystal, molecules are linked via weak N—H...π interactions, forming chains along [010]. The compound displays solvent-dependent behaviours in both NMR and fluorescence spectroscopy. In the 1 H NMR spectra, the aliphatic resonance signals virtually coalesce in solvents such as chloroform, dichloromethane and dibromoethane; however, they are fully resolved in solvents such as dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), methanol and toluene. The excitation and fluorescence intensities in chloroform decreased significantly over time, while in DMSO the decrease is not so profound. In toluene, the excitation and fluorescent intensities are not time-dependent. This behaviour is presumably attributed to the assembly of 3-amino-4,4-diphenyl-BODIPY in solution that leads to the formation of noncovalent structures, while in polar or aromatic solvents, the formation of these assemblies is disrupted, leading to resolution of signals in the NMR spectra.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0040.002
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.254 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Crystallographica Section E Crystallographic CommunicationsSame topicLuminescence and Fluorescent MaterialsFrench-language works237,207