MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2737812900 · doi:10.1021/acsphotonics.7b00102

Revisiting an Ongoing Debate: What Role Do Surface Groups Play in Silicon Nanocrystal Photoluminescence?

2017· article· en· W2737812900 on OpenAlexafffund
Regina Sinelnikov, Mita Dasog, John Beamish, A. Meldrum, Jonathan G. C. Veinot

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Photonics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSilicon Nanostructures and Photoluminescence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftAlberta InnovatesKillam TrustsAlberta Innovates - Technology Futures
KeywordsPhotoluminescenceLuminescenceNanocrystalAlkylMaterials scienceQuantum yieldSinc functionSiliconWavelengthNanotechnologyChemical physicsOptoelectronicsChemistryOpticsPhysicsFluorescence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The origin of photoluminescence (PL) in silicon nanocrystals (SiNCs) remains a subject of considerable debate. Size-dependent PL that supports the quantum confinement model has been proposed by several researchers. On the other hand, SiNC PL arising from surface states that are independent of nanocrystal size has also been shown. This work addresses the origin of surface-functionalized SiNC PL as relating to surface states and the NC size. SiNCs of different sizes (3 and 5 nm diameters) were prepared with three distinct surface chemistries. Steady-state and time-resolved PL measurements were performed at temperatures ranging from 37 to 377 K. Temperature-dependent luminescence consistent with core emission was observed for alkyl-terminated SiNCs, while alkylamine-functionalized SiNCs displayed minimal temperature-dependent luminescence, consistent with a charge-transfer mechanism. Lightly oxidized alkyl SiNCs had similar emission profiles to alkyl SiNCs; however, they showed longer luminescence lifetimes and their luminescence spectrum was shifted to shorter wavelengths than their nonoxidized counterparts. A general mechanism is proposed to explain all three phenomena, suggesting that surface groups play a crucial role in SiNC optical response.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.012
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.262
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations68
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS PhotonicsSame topicSilicon Nanostructures and PhotoluminescenceFrench-language works237,207