4.7 Article

Enhancing the conductivity of molecular electronic devices

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS
卷 146, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/1.4972992

关键词

-

资金

  1. Research Foundation-Flanders (FWO) [11ZG615N]
  2. National Science Foundation [CHE-1305872]
  3. Division Of Chemistry
  4. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1305872] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We show in this work that conjugated pi-electron molecular chains can, in quite specific and understood circumstances, become more conductive the longer they get, in contradiction to what would be expected intuitively. The analysis, done in the framework of the source and sink potential method, and supported by detailed transmission calculations, begins by defining relative transmission,an inherent measure of molecular conduction. This, in turn, for conjugated hydrocarbons, is related to a simple molecular orbital expression-the ratio of secular determinants of a molecule and one where the electrode contacts are deleted-and a valence bond idea, since these secular determinants can alternatively be expressed in terms of Kekule structures. A plausible argument is given for relating the relative transmission to the weight of the diradical resonance structures in the resonance hybrid for a molecule. Chemical intuition can then be used to tune the conductivity of molecules by pushing them towards more or less diradical character. The relationship between relative transmission (which can rise indefinitely) and molecular transmission is carefully analyzed-there is a sweet spot here for engineering molecular devices. These new insights enable the rationalization of a wide variety of experimental and theoretical results for pi-conjugated alternant hydrocarbons, especially the striking difference between extended oligophenylenes and related quinoid chains. In this context, oligo-p-phenylene macrocycles emerge as a potential molecular switch. Published by AIP Publishing.

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

4.7
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