MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783625036 · doi:10.1002/cplu.201700489

Theoretical Studies of Singlet Fission: Searching for Materials and Exploring Mechanisms

2018· review· en· W2783625036 on OpenAlexafffund
Achini Japahuge, Tao Zeng

Bibliographic record

VenueChemPlusChem · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMolecular Junctions and Nanostructures
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCarleton University
KeywordsSinglet fissionFissionSinglet stateChromophoreExcitonChemical physicsChemistryPhysicsPhotochemistryNuclear physicsQuantum mechanicsNeutronExcited state

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this Review article, a survey is given for theoretical studies in the subject of singlet fission. Singlet fission converts one singlet exciton to two triplet excitons. With the doubled number of excitons and the longer lifetime of the triplets, singlet fission provides an avenue to improve the photoelectric conversion efficiency in organic photovoltaic devices. It has been a subject of intense research in the past decade. Theoretical studies play an essential role in understanding singlet fission. This article presents a Review of theoretical studies in singlet fission since 2006, the year when the research interest in this subject was reignited. Both electronic structure and dynamics studies are covered. Electronic structure studies provide guidelines for designing singlet fission chromophores and insights into the couplings between single- and multi-excitonic states. The latter provides fundamental knowledge for engineering interchromophore conformations to enhance the fission efficiency. Dynamics studies reveal the importance of vibronic couplings in singlet fission.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations112
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemPlusChemSame topicMolecular Junctions and NanostructuresFrench-language works237,207