1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
f
Communication: Systematic shifts of the lowest unoccupied molecular orbital peak in x-ray absorption for a series of 3d metal porphyrins
Rent:
Rent this article for
Access full text Article
/content/aip/journal/jcp/133/15/10.1063/1.3497188
1.
1.The Porphyrin Handbook, edited by K. M. Kadish, K. M. Smith, and R. Guilard (Academic, San Diego, 2000).
2.
2.J. E. Kroeze, T. J. Savenije, and J. M. Warman, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 126, 7608 (2004).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ja039303u
3.
3.Y. Bai, Y. M. Cao, J. Zhang, M. Wang, R. Z. Li, P. Wang, S. M. Zakeeruddin, and M. Gratzel, Nature Mater. 7, 626 (2008).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nmat2224
4.
4.A. J. Lee, A. A. Ensign, T. D. Krauss, and K. L. Bren, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 132, 1752 (2010).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ja909106p
5.
5.P. Wang, S. M. Zakeeruddin, J. E. Moser, M. K. Nazeeruddin, T. Sekiguchi, and M. Gratzel, Nature Mater. 2, 402 (2003).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nmat904
6.
6.A. J. Mozer, M. J. Griffith, G. Tsekouras, P. Wagner, G. G. Wallace, S. Mori, K. Sunahara, M. Miyashita, J. C. Earles, K. C. Gordon, L. Du, R. Katoh, A. Furube, and D. L. Officer, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 131, 15621 (2009).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ja9057713
7.
7.With LUMO we always mean the orbital shown in Fig. 2. Strictly speaking, this is not always the LUMO orbital in the OEPs series, because in some cases, such as CoOEP or NiOEP, one of the d-like levels of the transition metal is unoccupied.
8.
8.P. L. Cook, X. S. Liu, W. L. Yang, and F. J. Himpsel, J. Chem. Phys. 131, 194701 (2009).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3257621
9.
9.G. te Velde, F. M. Bickelhaupt, E. J. Baerends, C. F. Guerra, S. J. A. Van Gisbergen, J. G. Snijders, and T. Ziegler, J. Comput. Chem. 22, 931 (2001).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcc.1056
10.
10.S. H. Vosko, L. Wilk, and M. Nusair, Can. J. Phys. 58, 1200 (1980).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/p80-159
11.
11.J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865 (1996).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.3865
12.
12.C. Adamo and V. Barone, J. Chem. Phys. 110, 6158 (1999).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.478522
13.
13.The method consists of a geometry optimization for the ground state, yielding the corresponding energy. At the same geometry the electronic configuration of an excited state is imposed (in this case the excited state corresponds to move one electron from the 1s orbital of one of the N atoms to the LUMO of the OEP), and the SCF procedure is performed again, to obtain the corresponding energy. The energy difference is taken as the electronic transition energy. This methodology describes the Franck–Condon transition (i.e. same geometry in the ground and the excited state) and thus the obtained results are compared with the maximum of intensity of the experimental absorption peaks. methodology describes correctly the electron-hole interaction.
14.
14.M. S. Liao and S. Scheiner, J. Chem. Phys. 114, 9780 (2001).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.1367374
15.
15.M. S. Liao, J. D. Watts, and M. J. Huang, Inorg. Chem. 44, 1941 (2005).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ic0401039
16.
16.B. Gonzalez, J. Kouba, S. Yee, and C. A. Reed, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 97, 3247 (1975).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ja00844a070
17.
17.J. F. Kirner, C. A. Reed, and W. R. Scheidt, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 99, 1093 (1977).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ja00446a020
18.
18.M. Stener, G. Fronzoni, and M. de Simone, Chem. Phys. Lett. 373, 115 (2003).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0009-2614(03)00543-8
19.
19.Y. Imamura, T. Otsuka, and H. Nakai, J. Comput. Chem. 28, 2067 (2007).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcc.20724
20.
20.N. Schmidt, R. Fink, and W. Hieringer, J. Chem. Phys. 133, 054703 (2010).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3435349
21.
21.A. D. Becke, J. Chem. Phys. 98, 1372 (1993).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.464304
22.
22.J. C. Slater, Adv. Quantum Chem. 6, 1 (1972).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065-3276(08)60541-9
23.
23.J. F. Janak, Phys. Rev. B 18, 7165 (1978).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.18.7165
24.
24.J. I. Rodriguez, R. F. W. Bader, P. W. Ayers, C. Michel, A. W. Gotz, and C. Bo, Chem. Phys. Lett. 472, 149 (2009).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cplett.2009.02.081
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jcp/133/15/10.1063/1.3497188
Loading
View: Figures

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.

Click to view

FIG. 1.

(a) NEXAFS spectra for a series of 3d metal OEPs sorted by their atomic number Z. The lowest energy peaks correspond to the to LUMO transition. The structure of an OEP is shown in the inset. (b) Comparison between experimental (left axis) and calculated (right axis) values for the maximum of the to LUMO transition peak of the series of OEPs. Notice that the axis is shifted 3.5 eV between calculated and experimental values. The systematic shift of the LUMO peak with the atomic number Z is reproduced by the calculation.

Image of FIG. 2.

Click to view

FIG. 2.

Frontier orbitals of the OEPs. The orbitals are labeled according to the symmetry group. The order of the orbitals from HOMO to HOMO-3 corresponds to MnOEP. This order varies depending on the considered OEP (Ref. 7). The LUMO is mainly determined by the orbitals of the aromatic rings, while the HOMOs are dominated by the 3d orbitals of the metal.

Image of FIG. 3.

Click to view

FIG. 3.

(a) Plot of the three energies contributing to the to LUMO transition observed in NEXAFS, i.e., the LUMO (blue diamonds, left axis), the core level (red squares, right axis), and the core electron-hole interaction (with negative sign, green circles, left axis). These energies are plotted for a series of 3d metal OEPs, sorted by their atomic number Z. They are obtained by a LDA calculation for the optimized geometry with in the core level and 0.5 e in the LUMO [following the transition state model proposed by Slater (Ref. 23)]. The core level shift dominates the shift of the to LUMO transition. (b) Bader charge on the nitrogen atoms vs the position of the level for the series of 3d metal OEPs. A turnaround of the charge transfer near the middle of the series scrambles the sequence of atomic numbers in this plot. The different charges on the N atoms along the OEP series cause a shift of the core levels and thus explain the shift of the to LUMO transitions in NEXAFS (see Fig. 1).

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/jcp/133/15/10.1063/1.3497188
2010-10-20
2014-04-18

Abstract

Porphyrins are widely used as dye molecules in solar cells. Knowing the energies of their frontier orbitals is crucial for optimizing the energy level structure of solar cells. We use near edge x-ray absorption fine structure(NEXAFS) spectroscopy to obtain the energy of the lowest unoccupied molecular orbital (LUMO) with respect to the core level of the molecule. A systematic energy shift of the to LUMO transition is found along a series of 3d metal octaethylporphyrins and explained by density functional theory. It is mainly due to a shift of the level rather than a shift of the LUMO or a change in the electron-hole interaction of the core exciton.

Loading

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/aip/journal/jcp/133/15/1.3497188.html;jsessionid=2vd481oibhb60.x-aip-live-03?itemId=/content/aip/journal/jcp/133/15/10.1063/1.3497188&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah&containerItemId=content/aip/journal/jcp
true
true
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Communication: Systematic shifts of the lowest unoccupied molecular orbital peak in x-ray absorption for a series of 3d metal porphyrins
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/jcp/133/15/10.1063/1.3497188
10.1063/1.3497188
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM