Cationic Imidazolium Polythiophenes: Effects of Imidazolium-Methylation on Solution Concentration-Driven Aggregation and Surface Free Energy of Films Processed from Solvents with Different Polarity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cationic imidazolium-functionalized polythiophenes with single- or double-methylation of the imidazolium ring were used to study the impact of imidazolium-methylation on (i) the solution concentration-driven aggregation in the presence of paramagnetic probes with different ionic and hydrophobic constituents and (ii) their surface free energy (SFE) as spin-coated films deposited on plasma-activated glass. Electron paramagnetic resonance spectroscopy shows that the differences in film structuration between the polymers with different methylations originate from the early stages of aggregation. In the solid state, higher degree of imidazolium-methylation generates smaller values of total SFE, γS, (by around 2 mN/m), which could be relevant in optoelectronic applications. Methylation also causes a decrease in the polar contribution of γS (γSp), suggesting that methylation decreases the polar nature of the imidazolium ring, probably due to the blocking of its H-bonding capabilities. The values of γS obtained in the present work are similar to the values obtained for doped films of neutral conjugated polymers, such as polyaniline, poly(3-hexylthiophene), and polypyrrole. However, imidazolium-polythiophenes generate films with a larger predominance of the dispersive component of γS (γSd), probably due to the motion restriction in the ionic functionalities in a conjugated polyelectrolyte, in comparison to regular dopants. The presence of 1,4-dioxane increases γSp, especially, in the polymer with larger imidazolium-methylation (and therefore unable to interact through H-bonding), probably by a decrease of the imidazolium–glass interactions. Singly-methylated imidazolium polythiophenes have been applied as electrode selective (“buffer”) interlayers in conventional and inverted organic solar cells, improving their performance. However, clear structure–function guidelines are still needed for designing high-performance polythiophene-based interlayer materials. Therefore, the information reported in this work could be useful for such applications.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".