Mixed Metal-Organic Dyes With Dual Electrophores: Designing More Robust Dyes for Light-Harvesting Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Donor-π-spacer-acceptor architectures are a favourable motif in the design of dyes for light harvesting applications. Organic compounds offer cost-effectiveness and synthetic design versatility, while inorganic compounds possess long term redox stability and wide range for absorption. Uniting both types of molecules allows utilization of these properties. Several projects were undertaken with the theme of a hybrid dye system and study of their redox stability. Chapter 1 gives a brief overview of the inorganic and organic compounds that paved the research in DSSC dyes. Chapter 2 details a review on copper(I) dyes in the literature and preliminary synthesis towards a D-π-A templated copper(I) dye. Chapter 3 looks into the robust potential of novel BODIPY dyes that utilize ferrocene as an electron rich donor. Chapter 4 represents a series of BODIPY-redox active donor dyads, the study of their redox stability provide insight on the decomposition pathway of these conjugates.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".