4.4 Article

A Theoretical Procedure Based on Classical Electrostatics and Density Functional Theory for Screening Non-Square-Shaped Mixed-Valence Complexes for Logic Gates in Molecular Quantum-Dot Cellular Automata

期刊

BULLETIN OF THE CHEMICAL SOCIETY OF JAPAN
卷 94, 期 2, 页码 397-403

出版社

CHEMICAL SOC JAPAN
DOI: 10.1246/bcsj.20200217

关键词

Biferrocene; Mixed-valence complex; QCA

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Sciences [JP19H01863]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study simplified the molecular shapes for quantum-dot cellular automata, presenting a practical procedure to design molecules that can respond accurately to different electric field patterns and function correctly in logic gates.
Understanding the requisite geometry of molecules and peripheral components is an essential step in endowing molecules with logical functions in quantum-dot cellular automata. To respond to the real problem of structural distortion from the ideal square cell configuration, a practical procedure is presented that simplifies the molecular shapes for device design with features that combine aspects of classical electrostatics and density functional theory calculations. By applying this method to a library of biferrocenium dimers with a three-input junction, it was demonstrated in theory that a covalently bonded parallelogram dimer responds precisely to six different patterns of nanoscale electric fields and works correctly as a device cell in both AND and OR logic gates. The counterintuitive usefulness of the non-square-shape is rationalized by four ferrocene-based orbital orientations and a functional group arrangement, equalizing the disadvantageous energy asymmetry between the states 0 and 1. The present procedure was applied to quasi-square tetrametallic Ru complexes and it was found that these complexes do not work as logic gates. This procedure expands the range of existing candidate molecules from squares to parallelograms and facilitates screening for implementation.

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

4.4
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