journal article·2014-08-26Open access

Effect of Molecular Fluctuations on Hole Diffusion within Dye Monolayers

Valérie Vaissier, Edoardo Mosconi, Davide Moia, Mariachiara Pastore, Jarvist M. Frost, Filippo De Angelis, Piers R. F. Barnes, Jenny Nelson

Chemistry of Materials· Volume 26· Issue 16

Abstract

Measured hole diffusion coefficients in dye monolayers are larger than can be explained by a charge hopping model with a static distribution of parameters describing intermolecular hole transfer. We show that large amplitude fluctuations of the tethered dye configurations on the surface could explain the observed diffusion rates by enabling charges trapped in particular configurations to escape as the dye orientation changes. We present a multiscale model of hole transport that includes the effect of dynamic rearrangement of the monolayer of anchored dyes. Conformations of pairs of indolene dye molecules (both D102 and D149) were generated by a rigid molecular packing algorithm and Car–Parrinello molecular dynamics to mimic the conformational and configurational disorder of a dye monolayer adsorbed to an anatase (101) titanium dioxide surface. The electronic coupling ( J ij ) for each pair of neighboring dyes was calculated to build distributions representing the disorder in a real system. These values were used as inputs to Marcus’ non-adiabatic equation for charge transfer to calculate the rate of hole hopping for each pair. Hole diffusion was simulated with a continuous time random walk, accounting for different time scales of molecular rearrangement (changes in the dye geometry). The dynamic nature of configurational disorder was captured by reassigning the values of J ij, drawn from the aforementioned distributions, after a fixed renewal time. We found hole diffusion coefficients of 3.3 × 10 –8 and 9.2 × 10 –8 cm 2 s –1 for D102 and D149, respectively, for a renewal time of 10 –7 s. This is in good agreement with the corresponding measured coefficients for D102 and D149 of 9.6 × 10 –8 and 2.5 × 10 –7 cm 2 s –1, whereas the diffusion coefficients are underestimated by at least a factor of 15 if the dynamics are ignored. Fast rearrangement of dye monolayer configuration may explain the high lateral hole diffusion coefficients determined experimentally. Our results indicate that both chemical structure and the availability of different packing configurations must be considered when designing conductive molecular monolayers.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Spectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies · Molecular Junctions and Nanostructures · Gold and Silver Nanoparticles Synthesis and Applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Imperial College London, South Kensington Campus, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom

Computational Laboratory for Hybrid/Organics Photovoltaics, CNR-ISTM, Via Elce di Sotto 8, 06123, Perugia, Italy

University of Bath, Bath, North East Somerset BA2 7AY, United Kingdom

Funding

Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council · European Commission · National Research Council of Italy

References (64)

Show source-provided references
1. O’Regan B. · Nature · 1991 · 353 · 73710.1038/353737a0 ↗
2. Bach U. · Nature · 1998 · 395 · 58310.1038/26936 ↗
3. Bonhôte P. · J. Phys. Chem. B · 1998 · 102 · 149810.1021/jp972890j ↗
4. Yang L. · Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. · 2011 · 14 · 77910.1039/C1CP23031J ↗
5. Fillinger A. · J. Electrochem. Soc. · 1999 · 146 · 455910.1149/1.1392674 ↗
6. Weisspfennig C. T. · Adv. Funct. Mater. · 2014 · 24 · 66810.1002/adfm.201301328 ↗
7. Wang Q. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2007 · 129 · 316310.1021/ja066260j ↗
8. Ardo S. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2011 · 133 · 1538410.1021/ja200652r ↗
9. Mathijssen S. G. J. · Nat. Nanotechnol. · 2009 · 4 · 67410.1038/nnano.2009.201 ↗
10. Hu K. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2014 · 136 · 103410.1021/ja410647c ↗
11. Song W. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2013 · 135 · 1158710.1021/ja4032538 ↗
12. Trammell S. A. · J. Phys. Chem. B · 2001 · 105 · 889510.1021/jp0116353 ↗
13. Zhao Y. · Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. · 2012 · 109 · 1561210.1073/pnas.1118339109 ↗
14. Soo H. S. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2012 · 134 · 1710410.1021/ja306162g ↗
15. Swierk J. R. · Chem. Soc. Rev. · 2013 · 42 · 235710.1039/C2CS35246J ↗
16. Rühle V. · J. Chem. Phys. · 2010 · 132 · 13410310.1063/1.3352568 ↗
17. Troisi A. · Phys. Rev. Lett. · 2009 · 102 · 11660210.1103/PhysRevLett.102.116602 ↗
18. Troisi A. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2004 · 126 · 221510.1021/ja038905a ↗
19. Car R. · Phys. Rev. Lett. · 1985 · 55 · 247110.1103/PhysRevLett.55.2471 ↗
20. Kenkre V. M. · J. Stat. Phys. · 1973 · 9 · 4510.1007/BF01016796 ↗
21. Montroll E. W. · J. Stat. Phys. · 1973 · 9 · 10110.1007/BF01016843 ↗
22. Cramer T. · Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. · 2005 · 7 · 403910.1039/b507454a ↗
23. Skourtis S. S. · Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. · 2005 · 102 · 355210.1073/pnas.0409047102 ↗
24. Kawatsu T. · J. Phys. Chem. B · 2006 · 110 · 574710.1021/jp052194g ↗
25. Grozema F. C. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2008 · 130 · 515710.1021/ja078162j ↗
26. Gutierrez R. · arXiv.org, e-Print Arch., Condens. Matter · 2009 · 0910
27. Castner E. W. · J. Phys. Chem. A · 2000 · 104 · 286910.1021/jp9936852 ↗
28. Vukmirović N. · Nano Lett. · 2009 · 9 · 399610.1021/nl9021539 ↗
29. Noriega R. · Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. · 2013 · 110 · 1631510.1073/pnas.1307158110 ↗
30. Senthilkumar K. · J. Chem. Phys. · 2003 · 119 · 980910.1063/1.1615476 ↗
31. Vehoff T. · J. Phys. Chem. C · 2010 · 114 · 1059210.1021/jp101738g ↗
32. Fornari R. P. · Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. · 2014 · 16 · 999710.1039/c3cp54661f ↗
33. Ciuchi S. · Phys. Rev. B · 2011 · 83 · 08120210.1103/PhysRevB.83.081202 ↗
34. Moia D. · Chem. Sci. · 2014 · 5 · 28110.1039/C3SC52359D ↗
35. Ding I.-K. · Adv. Funct. Mater. · 2009 · 19 · 243110.1002/adfm.200900541 ↗
36. Snaith H. J. · Adv. Funct. Mater. · 2009 · 19 · 181010.1002/adfm.200801751 ↗
37. Fattori A. · J. Phys. Chem. C · 2010 · 114 · 1182210.1021/jp103808u ↗
38. Pastore M. · ACS Nano · 2010 · 4 · 55610.1021/nn901518s ↗
39. Pastore M. · J. Phys. Chem. Lett. · 2011 · 2 · 126110.1021/jz200443w ↗
40. Nunzi F. · ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces · 2014 · 6 · 247110.1021/am404293x ↗
41. Vittadini A. · Phys. Rev. Lett. · 1998 · 81 · 295410.1103/PhysRevLett.81.2954 ↗
42. Pastore M. · Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. · 2011 · 14 · 92010.1039/C1CP22663K ↗
43. Pastore M. · J. Phys. Chem. Lett. · 2013 · 4 · 95610.1021/jz302147v ↗
44. Li X. · Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. · 2011 · 13 · 157510.1039/C0CP01013H ↗
45. Howie W. H. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2008 · 130 · 136710.1021/ja076525+ ↗
46. Martínez L. · Comput. Chem. · 2009 · 30 · 215710.1002/jcc.21224 ↗
47. Martínez J. M. · Comput. Chem. · 2003 · 24 · 81910.1002/jcc.10216 ↗
48. Valeev E. F. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2006 · 128 · 988210.1021/ja061827h ↗
49. Bredas J. L. · Chem. Rev. · 2004 · 104 · 497110.1021/cr040084k ↗
50. Coropceanu V. · Chem. Rev. · 2007 · 107 · 92610.1021/cr050140x ↗
51. Pietro W. J. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 1985 · 107 · 538710.1021/ja00305a011 ↗
52. Kirkpatrick J. · Int. J. Quantum Chem. · 2007 · 108 · 5110.1002/qua.21378 ↗
53. Senthilkumar K. · J. Chem. Phys. · 2003 · 119 · 980910.1063/1.1615476 ↗
54. Nelson J. · Acc. Chem. Res. · 2009 · 42 · 176810.1021/ar900119f ↗
55. Druger S. D. · J. Chem. Phys. · 1983 · 79 · 313310.1063/1.446144 ↗
56. Vaissier V. · Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. · 2013 · 15 · 480410.1039/c3cp44562c ↗
57. Geng H. · Adv. Mater. · 2012 · 24 · 356810.1002/adma.201104454 ↗
58. Wang L. · Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. · 2010 · 12 · 330910.1039/b913183c ↗
59. Van de Lagemaat J. · J. Phys. Chem. B · 2001 · 105 · 1243310.1021/jp013369z ↗
60. Wang Q. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2006 · 128 · 444610.1021/ja058616h ↗
61. Perdew J. P. · Phys. Rev. Lett. · 1996 · 77 · 386510.1103/PhysRevLett.77.3865 ↗
62. Giannozzi P. · J. Phys.: Condens. Matter · 2009 · 21 · 395502
63. Martsinovich N. · J. Phys. Chem. C · 2010 · 114 · 2265910.1021/jp109756g ↗
64. Frisch, M. J.Gaussian 09, Revision D.01;Gaussian Inc.:Wallingford, CT, 2009.