Peripherally mixed halogenated boron subphthalocyanines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this study was to develop mixtures of peripherally halogenated boron subphthalocyanines (BsubPcs) to explore these macrocycles as mixed alloys for applications within the organic electronic space. These halogenated BsubPc mixtures were synthesized by reacting mixtures of commercially available phthalonitriles, namely 4,5-dichlorophthalonitrile (Cl 2 -pn), 4,5-difluorophthalonitrile (F 2 -pn), tetrachlorophthalonitrile (Cl 4 -pn), and tetrafluorophthalonitrile (F 4 -pn), with boron trichloride (BCl[Formula: see text] to achieve mixed halogenation upon formation of the BsubPcs. More specifically, as named, Cl 2 -pn + F 2 -pn and Cl 4 -pn + F 4 -pn mixtures were used to form Cl-Cl[Formula: see text]F[Formula: see text]BsubPc and Cl-Cl[Formula: see text]F[Formula: see text]BsubPc, respectively. To establish a firm synthetic methodology, the reaction kinetics of forming the BsubPc mixtures from their respective phthalonitrile mixtures were compared to the kinetics of the standard procedures forming the individual BsubPcs, for example, Cl-Cl[Formula: see text]BsubPc from Cl 4 -pn. As we use BCl 3 to form the BsubPcs, the axial bond is in general chloride, but we observed again random fluoride axial exchange, and therefore moved to the second step to have complete axial fluorination. Crude mixed halogenated BsubPcs were sublimed at high purities to enable physical characterization, including a study of UV-Vis absorption spectra differentiation, and cyclic (CV) and differential pulse voltammograms (DPV) electrochemical differentiation. We also did density functional theory (DFT) calculations for points of physical properties comparison. The comparison points are together with fully peripherally chlorinated Cl[Formula: see text]BsubPcs and fluorinated F[Formula: see text]BsubPcs. Given the outcomes, we foresee in future studies the ability to tune different ratios of peripherally halogenated BsubPc mixtures via synthetic tools, to enable tuning of the HOMO LUMO energy levels, which could consequently tune their application and performance in organic electronics.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".