| Literature DB >> 27456200 |
Li Yuan1, Carlos Franco2, Núria Crivillers2, Marta Mas-Torrent2, Liang Cao1, C S Suchand Sangeeth1, Concepció Rovira2, Jaume Veciana2, Christian A Nijhuis1,3,4.
Abstract
The energy-level alignment of molecular transistors can be controlled by external gating to move molecular orbitals with respect to the Fermi levels of the source and drain electrodes. Two-terminal molecular tunnelling junctions, however, lack a gate electrode and suffer from Fermi-level pinning, making it difficult to control the energy-level alignment of the system. Here we report an enhancement of 2 orders of magnitude of the tunnelling current in a two-terminal junction via che<span class="Gene">mical molecular orbital control, changing chemically the molecular component between a stable radical and its non-radical form without altering the supramolecular structure of the junction. Our findings demonstrate that the energy-level alignment in self-assembled monolayer-based junctions can be regulated by purely chemical modifications, which seems an attractive alternative to control the electrical properties of two-terminal junctions.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27456200 PMCID: PMC4963472 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms12066
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Commun ISSN: 2041-1723 Impact factor: 14.919
Figure 1Schematic illustrations of the junctions.
Schematic representations of the junctions of AuTS-SC10PTMR/NR//GaOcond/EGaIn and the corresponding energy level diagrams. The top-electrodes (a) are liquid metal GaOcond/EGaIn (where EGaIn is the eutectic alloy of Ga and In, and GaOcond is a 0.7-nm-thick self-limiting highly conductive oxide layer)151617. The bottom electrodes (b) are template-stripped Au surfaces (∼300-nm-thick, see fabrication methods in ref. 11 and Methods for details). The ΔE and δEME represent the molecular energy gap and zero-bias energy off-set between the LUMO (or SUMO) and the Fermi level of the electrodes, respectively. Red dots show the central C atoms of radical moieties. The distance (d) between two electrodes is about 2.1 nm.
Figure 2Synthetic route to radicals HSCPTMR and non-radicals HSCPTMNR.
DBU, 1, 8-diazabicycloundec-7-ene; tBuOK, potasium tert-butoxide; DMSO, dimtehylsulfoxide; DCM, dichloromethane; ET3N, triethylamine; SO3Py, sulfur trioxide pyridine; Bu4NOH, tetrabutylammonium hydroxide; ET3Si, triethylsilane; THF, tetrahydrofurane; TFA, trifluoroacetic acid; rt, room temperature.
Figure 3Electronic structure of the PTMR/NR SAMs on AuTS.
(a) Ultraviolet photoemission spectroscopy (UPS) and (b) C K-edge X-ray absorption fine structure (NEXAFS) spectra of SAMs derived from HSCPTMR with n=8, 10, 12 and HSC12PTMNR.
Statistics of electrical characterization of the PTM-based junctions and energy level determination by UPS and NEXAFS spectroscopy at room temperature.
| SAM | Number of junctions | Traces | Short | Yield (%) | Work function (eV) | SOMO/HOMO (eV) | SUMO/LUMO (eV) | Energy gap (eV) | δ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R8 | 20 | 424 | 2 | 90 | 1.83 | 4.12±0.05 | −5.65±0.02 | −3.72±0.10 | 1.93±0.12 | 0.40±0.15 |
| R10 | 20 | 417 | 3 | 85 | 2.05 | 4.15±0.05 | −5.69±0.02 | −3.65±0.10 | 2.04±0.12 | 0.50±0.15 |
| R12 | 20 | 424 | 2 | 90 | 2.20 | 4.20±0.05 | −5.72±0.02 | −3.51±0.10 | 2.21±0.12 | 0.69±0.15 |
| NR8 | 20 | 420 | 2 | 90 | 1.79 | 4.28±0.05 | −6.95±0.02 | −3.08±0.10 | 3.87±0.12 | 1.20±0.15 |
| NR10 | 20 | 420 | 2 | 90 | 2.08 | 4.26±0.05 | −7.02±0.02 | −3.00±0.10 | 4.02±0.12 | 1.26±0.15 |
| NR12 | 20 | 424 | 1 | 95 | 2.22 | 4.26±0.05 | −6.95±0.02 | −2.86±0.10 | 4.09±0.12 | 1.40±0.15 |
ARXPS, angle-resolved X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy; HOMO, highest-occupied molecular orbital; LUMO, lowest occupied molecular orbital; NEXAFS, near edge X-ray adsorption fine structure spectroscopy; NR, non-radical; SAM, self-assembled monolayer; SOMO, single occupied molecular orbital; SUMO, single unoccupied molecular orbital.
*A junction short was defined when the value of J exceeded 102 A cm−2 (the upper limit of J measurable by our instrument) while recording 20 J(V) scans.
†The yield of non-shorting junctions is defined as the percentage number of non-shorting junctions divided by the total number of junctions.
‡The thickness d was determined by ARXPS. The error bars were 0.2 nm (see Methods for details).
§The work function and the energy of the SOMO/HOMO were determined by UPS (see Methods for details).
||The energy level of SUMO/LUMO was determined by NEXAFS spectroscopy (see Methods for details).
¶The energy gap was calculated by the difference between the HOMO and LUMO for the NR SAM and SOMO and SUMO for the R SAM.
#The value of δEME was calculated by the difference between the work function and SUMO/LUMO.
Figure 4Electrical characteristics of the tunnelling junctions at room temperature.
(a,c,e) Plots of the
Figure 5Temperature dependence measurements.
(a) Semi-log plots of the average J(V) curves measured over the temperature range of 210–340 K at intervals of 10 K for AuTS-SCPTMR SAMs with n=8, 10 and 12 and (b) Arrhenius plots of the average J at −1.0 V. The error bars represent the standard deviations of 10 J(V) curves.
Figure 6General tunnelling equation fit.
The average values of J (A cm−2) at −1.0 V as a function of carbon number (n) for AuTS-SCPTMR/NR//GaOcond/EGaIn junctions. The dashed lines represented the fits to the general tunnelling equation. The red error bars represent the 95% confidence interval.