| Literature DB >> 27897363 |
Xunshan Liu1, Sara Sangtarash2, David Reber1, Dan Zhang3, Hatef Sadeghi2, Jia Shi3, Zong-Yuan Xiao3, Wenjing Hong3, Colin J Lambert2, Shi-Xia Liu1.
Abstract
To guide the choice of future synthetic targets for single-molecule electronics, qualitative design rules are needed, which describe the effect of modifying chemical structure. Here the effect of heteroatom substitution on destructive quantum interference (QI) in single-molecule junctions is, for the first time experimentally addressed by investigating the conductance change when a "parent" meta-phenylene ethylene-type oligomer (m-OPE) is modified to yield a "daughter" by inserting one nitrogen atom into the m-OPE core. We find that if the substituted nitrogen is in a meta position relative to both acetylene linkers, the daughter conductance remains as low as the parent. However, if the substituted nitrogen is in an ortho position relative to one acetylene linker and a para position relative to the other, destructive QI is alleviated and the daughter conductance is high. This behavior contrasts with that of a para-connected parent, whose conductance is unaffected by heteroatom substitution. These experimental findings are rationalized by transport calculations and also agree with recent "magic ratio rules", which capture the role of connectivity in determining the electrical conductance of such parents and daughters.Entities:
Keywords: density functional calculations; heteroatom effects; molecular electronics; quantum interference; single-molecule transport
Year: 2016 PMID: 27897363 PMCID: PMC5396325 DOI: 10.1002/anie.201609051
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl ISSN: 1433-7851 Impact factor: 15.336
Scheme 1Chemical structures of the investigated molecules.
Figure 1A) Typical individual conductance–distance traces of blank experiment in TMB/THF (gray) and molecules ‐OPE (black), ‐OPE (brown), P (orange), M1 (green), M2 (blue) and M3 (red). B,C) All‐data‐point 1D conductance histograms constructed from 1000 MCBJ traces of each molecule. D) All‐data‐point 2D conductance versus relative distance (Δz) of the molecule P. The stretching distance distribution is determined from the range of 0.7 G 0 to 10−5 G 0.
A summary of an experimental and theoretical study on the single‐molecule junction conductances of ‐OPE, ‐OPE, P and M1–M3.
| Molecule | Experimental conductance | Conductance ratio[a] | DFT conductance ratio[b] | Core transmission | Core transmission ratio[e] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 10−5.5±0.05 | 0.32 | 0.02 | 0[c] | 0 |
|
| 10−4.0±0.1 | 12.59 | 13.40 | 4[c] | 30.77 |
|
| 10−4.0±0.1 | 12.59 | 14.00 | 4.75[d] | 36.6 |
|
| 10−5.55±0.05 | 0.32 | 0.04 | 0.048[d] | 0.37 |
|
| 10−4.35±0.05 | 5.18 | 5.12 | 0.67[d] | 5.15 |
|
| 10−5.1±0.05 | 1 | 1 | 0.13[d] | 1 |
[a] Experimental conductance divided by experimental conductance of M3. [b] DFT conductance divided by DFT conductance of M3 at E F=0.9. [c] Core transmission of parents at E F p=0. [d] Core transmission of daughters at E F d=0.211. [e] Core transmission divided by core transmission of M3.
Figure 2A) 1D conductance histograms of R1 (black), R2 (blue) and R3 (red), constructed from 1000 MCBJ traces of each molecule. B–D) 2D conductance histograms of R1–R3, respectively, and stretching distance Δz distributions (inset). The stretching distance distribution is determined from the range of 0.7 G 0 to 10−5 G 0.
Figure 3A) Core transmission coefficients τ ij(E) of the molecules ‐OPE, ‐OPE, P, M1–M3 against E/δ, where δ is half of the HOMO–LUMO gap of the parental core; i.e. δ=1, using DFT transport approach implemented in Gollum.15 B) The calculated transmission coefficients T ij(E) of the molecules ‐OPE, ‐OPE, P, M1–M3, connected to gold electrodes using the mean‐field Hamiltonian from Siesta.14 Dashed lines correspond to “parents” and solid lines to “daughters”.