MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206300950 · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv.12711770.v1

Phosphoryl- and Phosphonium-Bridged Viologens as Stable Two- and Three-Electron Acceptors for Organic Electrodes

2020· preprint· en· W3206300950 on OpenAlexafffund
Colin R. Bridges, Andryj M. Borys, Vanessa A. Béland, Joshua R. Gaffen, Thomas Baumgartner

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSynthesis and characterization of novel inorganic/organometallic compounds
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsElectrochemistryElectrodeElectronPhosphoniumElectron acceptorSulfideMoleculeChemistryMaterials sciencePhotochemistryOrganic chemistryPhysical chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low molecular weight organic molecules that can accept multiple electrons at highreduction potentials are sought after as electrode materials for high-energy sustainable batteries. To date their synthesis has been difficult, and organic scaffolds for electron donors significantly outnumber electron acceptors. Herein, we report two highly electron deficient phosphaviologen derivatives from a phosphorus-bridged 4,4-bipyridine and characterize their electrochemical properties. Phosphaviologen sulfide (PVS) and P-methyl phosphaviologen (PVM) accept two and three electrons at high reduction potentials, respectively. PVM can reversibly accept 3 electrons between 3-3.6 V vs. Li/Li+ with an equivalent molecular weight of 102 g/(mol e-) (262 mAh/g), making it a promising scaffold for sustainable organic electrode materials having high specific energy densities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemRxivSame topicSynthesis and characterization of novel inorganic/organometallic compoundsFrench-language works237,207