More Like this

1. Pseudocapacitive Charge Storage in Layered Oxides SrLaFe1-xCoxO4-δ (x = 0 - 1)

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2021.129859  

   Alom, M.S.; Ramezanipour, F. (July 2021, Materials letters)
2. Optimization of crystal packing in semiconducting spin-crossover materials with fractionally charged TCNQ ^δ− anions (0 < δ < 1)

   https://doi.org/10.1039/D1SC02843J  

   Üngör, Ökten; Choi, Eun Sang; Shatruk, Michael (August 2021, Chemical Science)

   Co-crystallization of the prominent Fe( ii ) spin-crossover (SCO) cation, [Fe(3-bpp) 2 ] 2+ (3-bpp = 2,6-bis(pyrazol-3-yl)pyridine), with a fractionally charged TCNQ δ − radical anion has afforded a hybrid complex [Fe(3-bpp) 2 ](TCNQ) 3 ·5MeCN (1·5MeCN, where δ = −0.67). The partially desolvated material shows semiconducting behavior, with the room temperature conductivity σ RT = 3.1 × 10 −3 S cm −1 , and weak modulation of conducting properties in the region of the spin transition. The complete desolvation, however, results in the loss of hysteretic behavior and a very gradual SCO that spans the temperature range of 200 K. A related complex with integer-charged TCNQ − anions, [Fe(3-bpp) 2 ](TCNQ) 2 ·3MeCN (2·3MeCN), readily loses the interstitial solvent to afford desolvated complex 2 that undergoes an abrupt and hysteretic spin transition centered at 106 K, with an 11 K thermal hysteresis. Complex 2 also exhibits a temperature-induced excited spin-state trapping (TIESST) effect, upon which a metastable high-spin state is trapped by flash-cooling from room temperature to 10 K. Heating above 85 K restores the ground-state low-spin configuration. An approach to improve the structural stability of such complexes is demonstrated by using a related ligand 2,6-bis(benzimidazol-2′-yl)pyridine (bzimpy) to obtain [Fe(bzimpy) 2 ](TCNQ) 6 ·2Me 2 CO (4) and [Fe(bzimpy) 2 ](TCNQ) 5 ·5MeCN (5), both of which exist as LS complexes up to 400 K and exhibit semiconducting behavior, with σ RT = 9.1 × 10 −2 S cm −1 and 1.8 × 10 −3 S cm −1 , respectively. 

   more » « less
3. Solvent‐Dependent Spin‐Crossover Behavior in Semiconducting Co–Crystals of [Fe(1‐bpp) ₂ ] ²⁺ Cations and TCNQ ^δ− Anions (0<δ<1)

   https://doi.org/10.1002/ejic.202100707  

   Üngör, Ökten; Choi, Eun_Sang; Shatruk, Michael (November 2021, European Journal of Inorganic Chemistry)

   Abstract Co‐crystallization of the spin‐crossover (SCO) cationic complex, [Fe(1‐bpp)₂]²⁺(1‐bpp=2,6‐bis(pyrazol‐1‐yl)pyridine) with fractionally charged organic anion TCNQ^δ−(0<δ<1) afforded hybrid materials [Fe(1‐bpp)₂](TCNQ)_3.5 ⋅ 3.5MeCN (1) and [Fe(1‐bpp)₂](TCNQ)₄ ⋅ 4DCE (2), where TCNQ=7,7,8,8‐tetracyanoquinodimethane, MeCN=acetonitrile, and DCE=1,2‐dichloroethane. Both materials exhibit semiconducting behavior, with the room‐temperature conductivity values of 1.1×10⁻⁴ S/cm and 1.7×10⁻³ S/cm, respectively. The magnetic behavior of both complexes exhibits strong dependence on the content of the interstitial solvent. Complex1undergoes a gradual temperature‐driven SCO, with the midpoint temperature ofT_1/2=234 K. The partial solvent loss by1leads to the increase in theT_1/2value while complete desolvation renders the material high‐spin (HS) in the entire studied temperature range. In the case of2, the solvated complex shows a gradual SCO withT_1/2=166 K only when covered with a mother liquid, while the facile loss of interstitial solvent, even at room temperature, leads to the HS‐only behavior. 

   more » « less
4. Isostructural Oxides Sr3Ti2−xMxO7−δ (M = Mn, Fe, Co; x = 0, 1) as Electrocatalysts for Water Splitting

   https://doi.org/10.3390/inorganics11040172  

   Kananke-Gamage, Chandana C.; Ramezanipour, Farshid (April 2023, Inorganics)
5. Measurements of the branching fractions of $$ {\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\pi}^0 $$, $$ {\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0\eta $$, and $$ {\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\eta}^{\prime } $$ and asymmetry parameter of $$ {\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\pi}^0 $$

   https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2024)045  

   Adachi, I; Aggarwal, L; Aihara, H; Akopov, N; Aloisio, A; Althubiti, N; Anh_Ky, N; Asner, D M; Atmacan, H; Aushev, T; et al (October 2024, Journal of High Energy Physics)

   A<sc>bstract</sc> We present a study of$$ {\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\pi}^0 $$ ${\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0{\pi }^0$,$$ {\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0\eta $$ ${\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0\eta$, and$$ {\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\eta}^{\prime } $$ ${\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0{\eta }^{\prime }$decays using the Belle and Belle II data samples, which have integrated luminosities of 980 fb⁻¹and 426 fb⁻¹, respectively. We measure the following relative branching fractions$$ {\displaystyle \begin{array}{c}\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\pi}^0\right)/\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}\right)=0.48\pm 0.02\left(\textrm{stat}\right)\pm 0.03\left(\textrm{syst}\right),\\ {}\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0\eta \right)/\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}\right)=0.11\pm 0.01\left(\textrm{stat}\right)\pm 0.01\left(\textrm{syst}\right),\\ {}\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\eta}^{\prime}\right)/\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}\right)=0.08\pm 0.02\left(\textrm{stat}\right)\pm 0.01\left(\textrm{syst}\right)\end{array}} $$ $\begin{array}{c}B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0{\pi }^0\right)/B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}\right)=0.48\pm 0.02\left(\text{stat}\right)\pm 0.03\left(\text{syst}\right),\\ B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0\eta \right)/B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}\right)=0.11\pm 0.01\left(\text{stat}\right)\pm 0.01\left(\text{syst}\right),\\ B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0{\eta }^{\prime }\right)/B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}\right)=0.08\pm 0.02\left(\text{stat}\right)\pm 0.01\left(\text{syst}\right)\end{array}$ for the first time, where the uncertainties are statistical (stat) and systematic (syst). By multiplying by the branching fraction of the normalization mode,$$ \mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}\right) $$ $B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}\right)$, we obtain the following absolute branching fraction results$$ {\displaystyle \begin{array}{c}\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\pi}^0\right)=\left(6.9\pm 0.3\left(\textrm{stat}\right)\pm 0.5\left(\textrm{syst}\right)\pm 1.3\left(\operatorname{norm}\right)\right)\times {10}^{-3},\\ {}\mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0\eta \right)=\left(1.6\pm 0.2\left(\textrm{stat}\right)\pm 0.2\left(\textrm{syst}\right)\pm 0.3\left(\operatorname{norm}\right)\right)\times {10}^{-3},\\ {}\mathcal{B}\left({\varXi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\eta}^{\prime}\right)=\left(1.2\pm 0.3\left(\textrm{stat}\right)\pm 0.1\left(\textrm{syst}\right)\pm 0.2\left(\operatorname{norm}\right)\right)\times {10}^{-3},\end{array}} $$ $\begin{array}{c}B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0{\pi }^0\right)=\left(6.9\pm 0.3\left(\text{stat}\right)\pm 0.5\left(\text{syst}\right)\pm 1.3\left(norm\right)\right)\times {10}^{-3},\\ B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0\eta \right)=\left(1.6\pm 0.2\left(\text{stat}\right)\pm 0.2\left(\text{syst}\right)\pm 0.3\left(norm\right)\right)\times {10}^{-3},\\ B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0{\eta }^{\prime }\right)=\left(1.2\pm 0.3\left(\text{stat}\right)\pm 0.1\left(\text{syst}\right)\pm 0.2\left(norm\right)\right)\times {10}^{-3},\end{array}$ where the third uncertainties are from$$ \mathcal{B}\left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^{-}{\pi}^{+}\right) $$ $B\left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^{-}{\pi }^{+}\right)$. The asymmetry parameter for$$ {\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\pi}^0 $$ ${\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0{\pi }^0$is measured to be$$ \alpha \left({\Xi}_c^0\to {\Xi}^0{\pi}^0\right)=-0.90\pm 0.15\left(\textrm{stat}\right)\pm 0.23\left(\textrm{syst}\right) $$ $\alpha \left({\Xi }_c^0\to {\Xi }^0{\pi }^0\right)=-0.90\pm 0.15\left(\text{stat}\right)\pm 0.23\left(\text{syst}\right)$. 

   more » « less