From molecular biaxiality of real board-shaped mesogens to phase biaxiality? On the hunt for the holy grail of liquid crystal science
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the search of the predicted biaxial nematic phase, a series of shape-persistent board-shaped mesogens with maximum molecular biaxiality and a dipole along the minor molecular axis were designed to form nematic (N) mesophases. One compound exhibits a wide nematic temperature range, which can be supercooled to room temperature. A comprehensive variable temperature X-ray study on aligned samples reveals patterns being dominated by the form factor of very small aggregates, from which the aspect ratio of the lead compound with length (L) : breadth (B) : width (W) of 10.73 : 3.16 : 1.23 could be obtained. The ratio is close to the predicted optimum molecular biaxiality by Straley's hard particle model. Hence variable temperature proton relaxation studies on this mesogen were carried out over a wide frequency range. The global fit of the frequency dispersions at five temperatures with a motional model requires in addition to the usual rotation/reorientation contribution, two independent director fluctuations contributions: one for the conventional nematic order director (n) fluctuations and the other for the minor director (m) fluctuations (normal to n). The correlation length of the minor directors determined by NMR could extend to 5-8 molecules in the W direction, but only to the nearest neighbour in the B direction, as found by X-ray diffraction. Both X-ray and NMR studies indicate that these new types of lead structure are extremely promising to find the long sought-after biaxial N mesophase.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".