MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3147756986 · doi:10.1002/cnma.202100096

Ligand‐Mediated Synthesis of Mixed‐Phase Mn<sup>2+</sup>‐Doped Cesium Lead Chloride Nanocrystals

2021· article· en· W3147756986 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueChemNanoMat · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPerovskite Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotoluminescenceOleylamineNanocrystalCaesiumLigand (biochemistry)LuminescenceCrystal structureDopingBand gapChemistryInorganic chemistryMaterials sciencePhotochemistryCrystallographyNanotechnologyOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Herein we report a study on the role of alkylamine ligand in tuning the crystal structure and the luminescence of Mn 2+ ‐doped cesium lead chloride (Mn−CPC) nanocrystals. In a typical hot‐injection synthesis of Mn−CPC, oleic acid (OA) and oleylamine (OLA) are used as the capping ligands to mediate the size and surface structure of the nanocrystals. We found that by either increasing the concentration of OLA or substituting OLA with an amine with a shorter chain length (e. g. dodecylamine), the resulted Mn−CPC contains both CsPbCl 3 and Cs 4 PbCl 6 phases. The mixed‐phase Mn−CPC exhibit two major photoluminescence emission bands originated from the CsPbCl 3 bandgap and the Mn d‐d transition, respectively. Besides, a near‐UV emission from Cs 4 PbCl 6 near‐band‐gap exciton emission also appears and is highly sensitive to the excitation wavelength. The formation mechanism of mixed‐phase Mn−CPC nanocrystals is proposed.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it