Conformational Analysis of the Supramolecular Complexation of Diaryl-Substituted Tetrathiafulvalene Vinylogues with Fullerenes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tetrathiafulvalene vinylogues (TTFVs) functionalized with diaryl substituents (aryl = 1-napthyl, 9-anthryl, and 1-pyrenyl) via click chemistry have been previously synthesized and studied as tweezer-type receptors for binding with C60 and C70 fullerenes. In particular, dianthryl-TTFV exhibits unique selectivity for C70 fullerene, giving rise to effective fluorescence turn-on sensing of C70 in the presence of a large excess of C60 fullerene. This observation indicated that dianthryl-TTFV has a preferential binding affinity for C70 over C60 fullerene, but the reason for such selectivity is unclear. Aiming at addressing this issue, we herein investigated the relative conformational stability of diaryl-substituted TTFVs in complexation with C70 and C60 fullerenes. The dispersion-corrected density functional theory approximation (B3LYP-D3) was employed in our computational analysis to determine binding energies and electronic properties of these supramolecular complexes. It was found that the highest binding energies (and the lowest relative conformational energies) are in pairings when fullerenes are placed around the central TTFV moieties (such as the triazole rings). The results of electronic properties show that the dianthryl-TTFV and dipyrenyl-TTFV conformers have lower highest occupied molecular orbital–lowest unoccupied molecular orbital gaps relative to the ones obtained for dinaphthyl-TTFV, indicating that dianthryl-TTFV, and to some extend dipyrenyl-TTFV, could be good candidates for chemical sensing of fullerenes with fluorescence spectroscopy. We also investigated the effect of the solvent on the interactions of the diaryl-TTFVs with fullerenes using the polarizable continuum model. In general, the presence of a solvent decreases the diaryl-TTFV/fullerene binding energies, presumably because of the interactions of the solvent with individual fullerenes and diaryl-TTFVs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".