4.8 Article

Large negative differential conductance in single-molecule break junctions

期刊

NATURE NANOTECHNOLOGY
卷 9, 期 10, 页码 830-834

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/NNANO.2014.177

关键词

-

资金

  1. Dutch Foundation for Fundamental Research on Matter (FOM)
  2. NWO/OCW
  3. FP7-framework programme ELFOS
  4. ERC grant [240299]
  5. ERC advanced grant (Mols@Mols)
  6. European Research Council (ERC) [240299] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Molecular electronics aims at exploiting the internal structure and electronic orbitals of molecules to construct functional building blocks(1). To date, however, the overwhelming majority of experimentally realized single-molecule junctions can be described as single quantum dots, where transport is mainly determined by the alignment of the molecular orbital levels with respect to the Fermi energies of the electrodes(2) and the electronic coupling with those electrodes(3,4). Particularly appealing exceptions include molecules in which two moieties are twisted with respect to each others(5,6) and molecules in which quantum interference effects are possible(7,8). Here, we report the experimental observation of pronounced negative differential conductance in the current-voltage characteristics of a single molecule in break junctions. The molecule of interest consists of two conjugated arms, connected by a non-conjugated segment, resulting in two coupled sites. A voltage applied across the molecule pulls the energy of the sites apart, suppressing resonant transport through the molecule and causing the current to decrease. A generic theoretical model based on a two-site molecular orbital structure captures the experimental findings well, as confirmed by density functional theory with non-equilibrium Green's functions calculations that include the effect of the bias. Our results point towards a conductance mechanism mediated by the intrinsic molecular orbitals alignment of the molecule.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据