Solution‐Processed 1D Wurtzite ZnS Nanostructures with Controlled Crystallographic Orientation and Tunable Band‐Edge Emission
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract 1D compound semiconductor nanomaterials possess unique physicochemical properties that strongly depend on their size, composition, and structures. ZnS has been widely investigated as one of the most important semiconductors, and the control of crystallographic orientation of 1D ZnS nanostructures is still challenging and crucial to exploring their anisotropic properties. Herein, a solution‐processed strategy is developed to synthesize 1D wurtzite ( w ‐)ZnS nanostructures with the specific <002> and <210> orientations by co‐decomposing the copper dibutyldithiocarbamate {[(C 4 H 9 ) 2 NCS 2 ] 2 Cu, i.e., R 2 Cu} and zinc dibutyldithiocarbamate (R 2 Zn) precursors in the mixed solvents of oleylamine and 1‐dodecanethoil. A solution–solid–solid (SSS)‐Oriented growth mechanism is proposed, which includes oriented nucleation dominated and SSS growth dominated stages. The crystallographic orientation mainly depends on the interfacial energy and ligand effect. The 1D w ‐ZnS nanostructures with controlled crystallographic orientation display unique morphologies, i.e., <002>‐oriented w ‐ZnS nanorod enclosed with {110} facets while <210>‐oriented w ‐ZnS nanobelt enclosed with wide (002) and narrow (110) facets. The bandgap of 1D w ‐ZnS nanostructures can be tuned from 3.94 to 3.82 eV with the crystallographic growth direction varied from <002> to <210>, thus leading to the tunable band‐edge emission from ≈338 to ≈345 nm.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".