Halide Perovskite–Chalcohalide Nanocrystal Heterostructures as a Platform for the Synthesis and Investigation of the CsPbCl <sub>3</sub> –CsPbI <sub>3</sub> Epitaxial Interface
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Halide exchange in lead‐based halide perovskites has been studied extensively. While mixed Cl/Br or Br/I alloy compositions can be formed with no miscibility gaps, this is precluded for mixed Cl/I compositions, due to the large difference in Cl − and I − ionic radii. Here, perovskite‐chalcohalide CsPbCl 3 –Pb 4 S 3 Cl 2 nanocrystal heterostructures are exploited to study the Cl→I exchange and to isolate new types of intermediate structures. The epitaxial interface between the Pb 4 S 3 Cl 2 chalcohalide and the CsPbCl 3 perovskite significantly influences the intermediate stages of halide exchange in the perovskite domain, leading to coexisting CsPbCl 3 and CsPbI 3 domains, thereby delivering segmented CsPbI 3 –CsPbCl 3 –Pb 4 S 3 Cl 2 , energetically favorable heterostructures, with partial I‐alloying of the CsPbCl 3 domain and at the perovskite–chalcohalide interface. The I:CsPbCl 3 domain between CsPbI 3 and Pb 4 S 3 Cl 2 enables a gradual lattice expansion across the heterostructure. This design accommodates interfacial strain, with a 5.6% mismatch at the CsPbCl 3 –CsPbI 3 interface and a 3.4% mismatch at the perovskite–chalcohalide interface. Full halide exchange leads to CsPbI 3 –Pb 4 S 3 Cl 2 heterostructures. Both in intermediate and fully exchanged heterostructures, the CsPbI 3 domain is emissive. In the intermediate structures, the band alignment between the two perovskite domains is type‐I, with the carriers photogenerated in the CsPbCl 3 domain quickly transferring to the CsPbI 3 domain, where they can recombine radiatively.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".