MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909244361 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.8b11815

Entropic Barriers Determine Adiabatic Electron Transfer Equilibrium

2019· article· en· W2909244361 on OpenAlexaff
Eric J. Piechota, Renato N. Sampaio, Ludovic Troian‐Gautier, Andrew B. Maurer, Curtis P. Berlinguette, Gerald J. Meyer

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPhotochemistry and Electron Transfer Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersOffice of ScienceBelgian American Educational Foundation
KeywordsAdiabatic processElectron transferExcited stateChemistryCoupling (piping)Intramolecular forceKinetic energyElectronAtomic physicsThermodynamicsChemical physicsMaterials sciencePhysical chemistryPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A thermodynamic analysis of the forward and reverse rate constants for adiabatic and nonadiabatic electron transfer equilibria over an 80 K temperature range is reported. The kinetic data were acquired by a spectroscopic approach that utilized excited state injection into TiO 2 by sensitizers with two redox active groups linked through aromatic bridges that allow for intramolecular adiabatic (bridge = phenyl) or nonadiabatic (bridge = xylyl) electron transfer. Two impactful results were garnered from this analysis: (1) entropic barriers controlled the adiabatic electron transfer kinetics, and (2) the free energy barriers were unaffected by the degree of electronic coupling within experimental uncertainty. The second result stands in contrast to the common expectation that enhanced electronic coupling lowers the free energy barrier. This analysis provides new insights into how electronic coupling influences the free energy and barriers for electron transfer reactions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry CSame topicPhotochemistry and Electron Transfer StudiesFrench-language works237,207