Beyond Graphene, Chemistry of Graphene Derivates and Its Inorganic Analogues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chemistry of graphene is growing rapidly in last decade and broad range of graphene derivates was prepared. Nevertheless, only two stoichiometric derivates are currently knownhydrogenated and fluorinated graphene (graphane and fluorographene). Compared to graphene, these materials exhibit significantly different properties, e.g. higher reactivity as well as large differences in physical properties. Especially fluorographene can be applied as a substrate for nucleophilic substitution reactions, which significantly extend the possible chemical modifications of graphene. Derivatisation can be effectively performed by organometallic reagents like Grignard reagents, which can be effectively used for introduction of e.g. triple bond for click-chemistry reactions. The nucleophilic substitutions also enable the introduction of other functionalities, e.g. amines, thiols as well as hydrogen due to the higher difference in bond polarity. The possibility to introduce new moiety to these derivates is significantly higher in comparison with graphene oxides where the combination of various oxygen functionalities significantly reduces the scope of such modifications.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".