This search combines search strings from the content search (i.e. "Full Text", "Author", "Title", "Abstract", or "Keywords") with "Article Type" and "Publication Date Range" using the AND operator.
Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 2017, 8, 943–955, doi:10.3762/bjnano.8.96
Figure 1: Chemical structures of the anionic complex fragments [Cu(opba)]2− (P1, left) and [Cu(opbon-Pr2)]2− (...
Figure 2: Echo detected ESR spectra of P1 at a frequency ν = 9.85 GHz (X-band) and at T = 20 K for the magnet...
Figure 3: Time dependence of the intensity of the echo signal for complex P1 at T = 30 K on a linear (main pa...
Figure 4: Temperature dependence of the phase relaxation time Tm of P1 and P2 at a frequency ν = 9.85 GHz mea...
Figure 5: Echo detected ESR spectra of P1 (top) and P2 (bottom) at a frequency ν = 33.899 GHz (P1) and 33.915...
Figure 6: Temperature dependence of the phase relaxation time Tm of P1 and P2 at a frequency ν = 33.9 GHz for...
Figure 7: Temperature dependence of the longitudinal relaxation time T1 of P1 and P2 at a frequency ν = 33.9 ...
Figure 8: CPMG echoes for complex P1 for two levels of the microwave power attenuation of 3 dB and 13 dB. Not...
Figure 9: CPMG experiment on complex P1 at ν = 33.9 GHz, T = 20 K, and H||z-axis: Separation of the refocused...
Figure 10: The calculated decay of the primary echo signal as a function of the time delay τ between the two p...
Figure 11: The calculated decay of the echo signal in the CPMG experiment as a function of the number n of the...
Figure 12: Comparison of the experimental and model dependences of the decay of the primary (a,c) and CPMG ech...
Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 2017, 8, 789–800, doi:10.3762/bjnano.8.82
Figure 1: Chemical structures of type I–IV complexes.
Figure 2: Expected J couplings between the central and terminal paramagnetic metal ions in type III/IV comple...
Scheme 1: Synthesis of the heterotrinuclear CuIINiIICuII type IV complexes 1–3.
Figure 3: ORTEP diagrams (50% ellipsoid probability) of the molecular structures of 1A (top), 2A (middle) and ...
Figure 4: Magnetization versus magnetic field M(H) of 1 at T = 1.8 K (symbols) together with the fit of M(H) ...
Figure 5: Magnetization versus magnetic field M(H) of 2 at T = 1.8 K (symbols) together with the fit of M(H) ...
Figure 6: Magnetization versus magnetic field M(H) of 3 at T = 1.8 K (symbols) together with the fit of M(H) ...
Figure 7: Temperature dependence of the magnetic susceptibility χ = M/H and of the corresponding inverse susc...
Figure 8: Temperature dependence of the magnetic susceptibility χ = M/H and of the corresponding inverse susc...
Figure 9: Temperature dependence of the magnetic susceptibility χ = M/H and of the corresponding inverse susc...
Figure 10: Main panel: Difference between the calculated and measured static susceptibility for 3. Inset: Temp...