| Literature DB >> 27073060 |
Mario Borgwardt1,2, Martin Wilke1,2, Thorsten Kampen3, Sven Mähl3, Manda Xiao4, Leone Spiccia4, Kathrin M Lange5, Igor Yu Kiyan1,2, Emad F Aziz1,2.
Abstract
Interfacial charge transfer from photoexcited ruthenium-based N3 dye molecules into ZnO thin films received controversial interpretations. To identify the physical origin for the delayed electron transfer in ZnO compared to TiO2, we probe directly the electronic structure at both dye-semiconductor interfaces by applying ultrafast XUV photoemission spectroscopy. In the range of pump-probe time delays between 0.5 to 1.0 ps, the transient signal of the intermediate states was compared, revealing a distinct difference in their electron binding energies of 0.4 eV. This finding strongly indicates the nature of the charge injection at the ZnO interface associated with the formation of an interfacial electron-cation complex. It further highlights that the energetic alignment between the dye donor and semiconductor acceptor states appears to be of minor importance for the injection kinetics and that the injection efficiency is dominated by the electronic coupling.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27073060 PMCID: PMC4829909 DOI: 10.1038/srep24422
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Schematic representation of the two models describing the charge transfer to ZnO after initial photoexcitation (1) of the N3 dye to the 1MLCT state.
In (a) after internal relaxation (2) to the 3MLCT state charge transfer (3) occurs on a ps timescale. The electron is retained in the dye molecule and the ultrafast direct injection from 1MLCT, as compared to TiO2, is suppressed. In (b) the transfer process is mediated by the formation of the interfacial complex (2) followed by slow (ps timescale) charge transfer (3). In this model, the electron is retained at the interface between the dye and the semiconductor.
Figure 2(Left) Steady-state XUV spectra of photoelectrons recorded for the bare (dashed lines) and sensitized (solid lines) ZnO and TiO2 samples.
The emission peak from the dye ground state and the valence band maxiumum are labeled by N3 and VB, respectively. (Right) The upper panel shows in detail the ionization contribution from the N3 HOMO band on both substrates. The signal for the bare and sensitized ZnO electrode was multiplied by a factor of five. The lower panel shows the difference in the emission yield between the sensitized and bare substrates for ZnO and TiO2, respectively.
Figure 3Transient signal of the sensitized ZnO and TiO2 substrates.
(a) Dependence of integrated electron yield of the background-subtracted XUV spectra on the pump-probe time delay. The solid lines represent results of fit to a sum of exponential functions convoluted with the system response function (see text). (b) Transient spectra averaged over pump-probe time delays between 0.5 to 1.0 ps (pump on) compared to the background steady-state spectra (pump off). (c) Difference of pump-on and pump-off spectra for both samples.