Room‐Temperature Formation Pathway for CdTeSe Alloy Magic‐Size Clusters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little is known about the pathway of room-temperature formation of ternary CdTeSe magic-size clusters (MSCs) obtained by mixing binary CdTe and CdSe induction period samples containing binary precursor compounds (PCs) of MSCs, monomers (Ms), and fragments (Fs). Also, unestablished are dispersion effects that occur when as-mixed samples (without incubation) are placed in toluene (Tol) and octylamine (OTA) mixtures. The resulting ternary MSCs, exhibiting a sharp optical absorption peak at 399 nm, are labelled CdTeSe MSC-399, and their PCs are referred to as CdTeSe PC-399. When the amount of OTA is relatively small, single-ensemble MSC-399 evolved without either binary CdTe or CdSe MSCs. When the OTA amount is relatively large, CdTe MSC-371 appeared initially and then disappeared, while single-ensemble MSC-399 developed more deliberately. The larger the OTA amount, the more slowly these changes proceeded. The substitution reaction of CdTe PC + CdSe M/F↔CdTeSe PC-399 + CdTe M/F is proposed to be rate-determining for the MSC-399 formation in a Tol and OTA mixture. This study provides further understanding of the transformation pathway between MSCs.
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".