Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 309

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Assessment of Cooperativity in Self-Assembly

Ercolani, Gianfranco·2003·Journal of the American Chemical Society

Abstract

A method has been proposed to assess cooperativity in self-assembly processes. The method is based on a clear distinction between intermolecular and intramolecular processes which are compared with the corresponding reference reactions. It has been applied to two classical cases, namely the self-assembly of helicates and of porphyrin ladders, by using data previously published by the groups of Lehn and Anderson, respectively. Contrarily to the conclusions of the authors, pointing out self-assembly processes driven by positive cooperativity, the method here presented indicates in both cases the absence of cooperative effects. The methods previously used to assess cooperativity, in particular Scatchard plot and/or Hill plot, are criticized as being inappropriate for self-assembly, because they are pertinent to a specific case only, namely the intermolecular binding of a monovalent ligand L to a multivalent receptor M, a case very different from self-assembly which involves both inter- and intramolecular interactions. The present method underscores the fact that positive cooperativity in artificial self-assembling systems is probably much more rare than it was previously thought.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/ja038396c

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Ercolani, G.
Venue
Journal of the American Chemical Society
Published
2003-12-01
Volume
125
Issue
51
Pages
16097-16103
ISSN
  • 0002-7863 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5126
OpenAlex
W2036611814
Cited by
309
References
0
FWCI
10.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.