| Literature DB >> 26718635 |
Christian Zwick1, Anu Baby2,3, Marco Gruenewald1, Elisabeth Verwüster2, Oliver T Hofmann2, Roman Forker1, Guido Fratesi3,4, Gian Paolo Brivio3, Egbert Zojer2, Torsten Fritz1,5.
Abstract
Alkali metal atoms are frequently used for simple yet efficient n-type doping of organic semiconductors and as an ingredient of the recently discovered polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon superconductors. However, the incorporation of dopants from the gas phase into molecular crystal structures needs to be controlled and well understood in order to optimize the electronic properties (charge carrier density and mobility) of the target material. Here, we report that potassium intercalation into the pristine 3,4,9,10-perylenetetracarboxylic dianhydride (PTCDA) monolayer domains on a Ag(111) substrate induces distinct stoichiometry-dependent structural reordering processes, resulting in highly ordered and large KxPTCDA domains. The emerging structures are analyzed by low-temperature scanning tunneling microscopy, scanning tunneling hydrogen microscopy (ST[H]M), and low-energy electron diffraction as a function of the stoichiometry. The analysis of the measurements is corroborated by density functional theory calculations. These turn out to be essential for a correct interpretation of the experimental ST[H]M data. The epitaxy types for all intercalated stages are determined as point-on-line. The K atoms adsorb in the vicinity of the oxygen atoms of the PTCDA molecules, and their positions are determined with sub-Ångström precision. This is a crucial prerequisite for the prospective assessment of the electronic properties of such composite films, as they depend rather sensitively on the mutual alignment between donor atoms and acceptor molecules. Our results demonstrate that only the combination of experimental and theoretical approaches allows for an unambiguous explanation of the pronounced reordering of KxPTCDA/Ag(111) upon changing the K content.Entities:
Keywords: density functional theory (DFT); low-energy electron diffraction (LEED); low-temperature scanning tunneling microscopy (LT-STM); potassium intercalation; scanning tunneling hydrogen microscopy (STHM); self-assembled nanostructures
Year: 2016 PMID: 26718635 PMCID: PMC4768340 DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.5b07145
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Nano ISSN: 1936-0851 Impact factor: 15.881
Figure 1Self-assembled structures of distinct KPTCDA phases on Ag(111) for x = 0, 2, and 4. (a), (b), and (c) show the STM image, structural model, and LEED image of pristine PTCDA/Ag(111). STHM images associated with x = 2 (d) and x = 4 (g) exhibit features originating from both K and PTCDA. Note that the determination of the unit cell compositions, especially for x = 4, is not straightforward and relies on the comparison with DFT calculations, discussed in the text. The deduced structural models are depicted for x = 2 (e) and x = 4 (h). In each LEED image (c), (f), and (i), the simulated reciprocal unit cell of the associated KPTCDA structure (x = 0 purple, x = 2 orange, and x = 4 blue) and the silver surface orientation along (01) and (10) (yellow) are superimposed. All possible rotational and mirror domains are considered for the simulation, and when taking multiple scattering into account (open circles), all visible spots are consistent with the model and none remain unidentified. The LEED image shown in (i) belongs to a substrate area simultaneously exhibiting domains corresponding to x = 2 and x = 4. Displayed quantities: VT bias voltage; ISP tunneling current; E beam energy; a⃗1, a⃗2 adsorbate lattice vectors; Γ = ∠(a⃗1,a⃗2) adsorbate unit cell angle; s⃗1, s⃗2 substrate lattice vectors with unit cell angle of ∠(s⃗1,s⃗2) = 120°; ϕ = ∠(s⃗1,a⃗1) domain angle; ξ( = (a⃗2,m⃗(A/B)) orientation of molecules A and B in the unit cell.
Structural Data of the Distinct KPTCDA Phases on Ag(111) Using the Same Nomenclature as in Figure a
| | | | | Γ (deg) | APTCDA (Å2) | ξ(A/B) (deg) | epitaxy matrix | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 12.59(1) | 18.95(2) | 90.99(5) | 119.3(2) | +49(3) | 36.60(4) | |
| 2 | 8.92(1) | 16.05(2) | 108.60(9) | 135.7(4) | –12(4) | 2.63(8) | |
| 4 | 9.57(1) | 16.77(2) | 91.66(1) | 160.4(4) | +2(3) | 51.68(6) |
All unit cell parameters are derived from LEED measurements, except the molecular orientations ξ(A/B) determined from ST[H]M measurements. The average area per molecule APTCDA is the unit cell area divided by the number of molecules per unit cell. Experimental uncertainties of the last significant digit are given in parentheses.
Figure 2Comparison of experimental STM and STHM images (a, c) with a simulated STM image (b) of the K2PTCDA phase. The main features originate from the PTCDA molecules, while the K atoms cause small single dots in STHM only. Note that in conventional STM (a) the features are smeared out; PTCDA and K cannot be distinguished. The adsorbate unit cell (orange boxes) comprising the structural model is superimposed in a semitransparent manner. The applied tunneling parameters VT (bias voltage), ISP (tunneling current), and ρiso (isovalue of the integrated density of states) are indicated.
Figure 3Comparison of experimental STM and STHM images (a, c) with a simulated STM image (b) of the K4PTCDA phase. The elongated features in STM mode originate from the PTCDA molecules. In the STHM mode, all K atoms are visible as sharp spots, while the bright blurred feature from the simulated and experimental STM (highlighted by the outermost dotted circle) remains visible as a “ghost feature” (highlighted by the innermost dotted circle); see the text for details. The unit cell of the adsorbate layer (blue boxes) comprising the structural model is superimposed in a semitransparent manner. The nonequivalent potassium positions KA and KB are marked. Explanations of the displayed quantities are identical to those in Figure .
Figure 4Tunneling-voltage-dependent contrast of the experimental STM images (a, b) compared to the simulated STM images (c, d). Each image comprises a close-up inset for a direct comparison of features associated with PTCDA and K. The unit cell of the adsorbate layer (blue boxes) comprising the structural model is superimposed in a semitransparent manner. Explanations of the displayed quantities are identical to those of Figure .