MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399074045 · doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.4c01497

Strongly Bound Excitons and Anisotropic Linear Absorption in Monolayer Graphullerene

2024· article· en· W4399074045 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Aurélie Champagne, María Camarasa‐Gómez, Francesco Ricci, Leeor Kronik, Jeffrey B. Neaton

Bibliographic record

VenueNano Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphene research and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAzrieli FoundationMaterials Sciences and Engineering Division
KeywordsMonolayerExcitonAnisotropyAbsorption (acoustics)Condensed matter physicsMaterials scienceMolecular physicsChemical physicsPhysicsNanotechnologyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graphullerene is a novel two-dimensional carbon allotrope with unique optoelectronic properties. Despite significant experimental characterization and prior density functional theory calculations, unanswered questions remain as to the nature, energy, and intensity of the electronic and optical excitations. Here, we present first-principles calculations of the quasiparticle band structure, neutral excitations, and absorption spectra of monolayer graphullerene and bulk graphullerite, employing the GW–Bethe–Salpeter equation (GW-BSE) approach. We show that strongly bound excitons dominate the absorption spectrum of monolayer graphullerene with binding energies up to 0.8 eV, while graphullerite exhibits less pronounced excitonic effects. Our calculations also reveal a strong linear polarization anisotropy, reflecting the in-plane structural anisotropy from intermolecular coupling between neighboring C 60 units. We further show that the presence of Mg atoms, crucial to the synthesis process, induces structural modifications and polarizability effects, resulting in a ∼1 eV quasiparticle gap renormalization and a reduction in the exciton binding energy to ∼0.6 eV.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.196
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations23
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNano LettersSame topicGraphene research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207