MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384565550 · doi:10.14447/jnmes.v26i2.a07

Influence of pH on the Growth of Tris-Allylthiourea Cadmium Chloride Single Crystals

2023· article· en· W4384565550 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
R. Perumal, S. Thanikaikarasan, R. Kanimozhi, M. Saravannan, S. Sudharthini

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of New Materials for Electrochemical Systems · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCrystallization and Solubility Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadmium chlorideTrisCadmiumChlorideChemistryBiochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Single crystal growth of non-linear optical material tris-allylthiourea cadmium chloride (ATCC) single crystals has been investigated.The crystals were grown from aqueous solution by slow evaporation as well as by slow cooling technique.The influence of pH of the solution on the morphological and optical properties of the grown crystals was investigated.At pH 5-6, the crystals are elongated along a-axis.Bulk crystals have been grown from the optimized pH value of 3-4.The powder XRD analysis carried out on the grown crystals indicate no variation in lattice parameter values for different pH values of the growth solution.The FTIR analysis confirms the presence of sulfur to cadmium bonds in the complex for the crystals grown at different pH values of the solution.The functional groups present in the crystals were confirmed by Raman spectral studies.The mechanical property of the crystal grown at optimized pH was studied using Vicker's microhardness method.The change in the crystal morphology at pH values 3-4, 4-5 and 5-6 was attributed to the growth rate variations of prismatic planes at different pH values of the growth solution.Crystals grown at an optimized pH value (3-4) possess higher optical transmittance.The second harmonic generation conversion efficiency was measured qualitatively using Nd:YAG laser.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of New Materials for Electrochemical SystemsSame topicCrystallization and Solubility StudiesFrench-language works237,207