A cautionary tale of basic azo photoswitching in dichloromethane finally explained
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many studies of azobenzene photoswitches are carried out in polar aprotic solvents as a first principles characterization of thermal isomerization. Among the most convenient polar aprotic solvents are chlorinated hydrocarbons, such as DCM. However, studies of azobenzene thermal isomerization in such solvents have led to spurious, inconclusive, and irreproducible results, even when scrupulously cleaned and dried, a phenomenon not well understood. We present the results of a comprehensive investigation into the root cause of this problem. We explain how irradiation of an azopyridine photoswitch with UV in DCM acts not just as a trigger for photoisomerization, but protonation of the pyridine moiety through photodecomposition of the solvent. Protonation markedly accelerates the thermal isomerization rate, and DFT calculations demonstrate that the singlet-triplet rotation mechanism assumed for many azo photoswitches is surprisingly abolished. This study implies exploitative advantages of photolytically-generated protons and finally explains the warning against using chlorinated solvent with UV irradiation in isomerization experiments.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".