(Invited) Emission Origin of Lowly-Oxidized Graphene Quantum Dot Toward Light Emitting Devices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Graphene quantum dots (GQDs), simply making graphene typically under 10 nm, and the change of emission behavior from known fluorescence on graphene draws huge interest for potential applications to display, lighting, and optoelectronic devices. GQD could be a new class of optical material with useful properties of tunable luminescence, low cost, and superior photo and chemical stability. Our group has developed unique exfoliation and dispersion methods of 2D materials by the intercalation of alkali metal/organics. With the advantage of the methods generally excluding, or controlling, the oxidation of 2D materials, we have studied the origin of intrinsic emission (~ 400 nm) of graphene in depth. With those samples, I will introduce the role of oxidation in GQDs which forms isolated small sp2 carbon hexagons within a GQD, known as subdomains. Experimental evidences supported with calculation of the formation energy of subdomains and bandgap will give a guideline to improve emission properties. With those understanding the first demonstration of GQD light-emitting diodes (GQD-LEDs) with 1,000 cd/m2, alternating current powder elctroluminescence (ACPEL) device, and GQD phosphorescence for security application promise the optical applications of 2D materials with further improvement.
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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".