Luminescent Platinum(II) Complexes with Stimuli‐Responsive Flexible Lewis Pair Ligands: Spectroscopic and Computational Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A series of new luminescent bimetallic platinum(II) complexes with stimuli-responsive flexible Lewis pair (FlexLP) ligands are described. The FlexLP ligands consist of a dimesitylboron Lewis acid and diphenylphosphine oxide Lewis base which are in equilibrium between the unbound open form and the Lewis adduct, controlled by the hydrogen bond donating strength of the solvent. Spectroscopic techniques and density functional theory (DFT) calculations were used to interpret the photophysics of the platinum(II) complexes. All complexes exhibit tunable absorption in the region of 300-500 nm and green to orange photoluminescence, depending on the ratio of weak (THF) to strong (MeOH) hydrogen bond donating solvent employed. Spectroscopic and computational data shows that phosphine and peripheral acetylide ligands on the platinum(II) centers have limited influence on the emission energy, indicating the emission originates from the FlexLP-dominated fluorescence. Using time-resolved transient absorption spectroscopy it is shown that the complexes undergo intersystem crossing (ISC) to the triplet excited state upon photoexcitation, and the ISC efficiency is affected by the peripheral acetylide ligands. The triplet excited state lifetime can also be manipulated by the state of the FlexLP ligand, with the closed form complexes having longer lifetimes than the open form complexes.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".