Multiresponsive Tetradentate Phosphorescent Metal Complexes as Highly Sensitive and Robust Luminescent Oxygen Sensors: Pd(II) Versus Pt(II) and 1,2,3-Triazolyl Versus 1,2,4-Triazolyl
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two Pd(II) complexes based on tetradentate chelate ligands with either a 1,2,4-triazolyl (Pd1) or 1,2,3-triazolyl (Pd2) unit were synthesized, and their structure–property relationships were studied. Both Pd1 and Pd2 are rare bright deep blue Pd(II) phosphors with contrasting properties. Pd1 displays stimuli-responsive luminescence in response to UV irradiation, concentration, or temperature change, which is ascribed to the facile switching of monomer to excimer emission. In contrast, a similar stimuli-responsive luminescence was not observed for Pd2. Crystal structures and time-dependent density functional theory computational studies established that the excimer formation of Pd1 is caused by electronically favored intermolecular π–π interactions and less steric protection of the Pd core because of the position of its alkyl chains, compared to Pd2. In solution, the excimer emission of Pd1 shows a much greater sensitivity toward oxygen than the monomer emission with a very large Stern–Volmer constant (Ksv) that is more than twice that of the monomer emission. Both Pd(II) complexes are found to be outstanding oxygen sensors in ethyl cellulose films with superior sensitivity (Ksvapp = 0.228–0.346 Torr–1) over their Pt(II) equivalents (Ksvapp = 0.00674–0.0110 Torr–1), owing to their long phosphorescence decay lifetimes. Furthermore, Pd1 shows an excellent photostability, compared to the Pt(II) analogue, making it one of the best and highly robust oxygen sensors based on cyclometalated metal complexes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".