Francesco Segatta1, Lorenzo Cupellini2, Marco Garavelli1, Benedetta Mennucci2. 1. Dipartimento di Chimica Industriale "Toso Montanari" University of Bologna , Viale del Risorgimento 4 , 40136 Bologna , Italy. 2. Dipartimento di Chimica e Chimica Industriale , University of Pisa , via G. Moruzzi 13 , 56124 Pisa , Italy.
Abstract
Multichromophoric biosystems represent a broad family with very diverse members, ranging from light-harvesting pigment-protein complexes to nucleic acids. The former are designed to capture, harvest, efficiently transport, and transform energy from sunlight for photosynthesis, while the latter should dissipate the absorbed radiation as quickly as possible to prevent photodamages and corruption of the carried genetic information. Because of the unique electronic and structural characteristics, the modeling of their photoinduced activity is a real challenge. Numerous approaches have been devised building on the theoretical development achieved for single chromophores and on model Hamiltonians that capture the essential features of the system. Still, a question remains: is a general strategy for the accurate modeling of multichromophoric systems possible? By using a quantum chemical point of view, here we review the advancements developed so far highlighting differences and similarities with the single chromophore treatment. Finally, we outline the important limitations and challenges that still need to be tackled to reach a complete and accurate picture of their photoinduced properties and dynamics.
Multichromophoric biosystems represent a broad family with very diverse members, ranging from light-harvesting pigment-protein complexes to nucleic acids. The former are designed to capture, harvest, efficiently transport, and transform energy from sunlight for photosynthesis, while the latter should dissipate the absorbed radiation as quickly as possible to prevent photodamages and corruption of the carried genetic information. Because of the unique electronic and structural characteristics, the modeling of their photoinduced activity is a real challenge. Numerous approaches have been devised building on the theoretical development achieved for single chromophores and on model Hamiltonians that capture the essential features of the system. Still, a question remains: is a general strategy for the accurate modeling of multichromophoric systems possible? By using a quantum chemical point of view, here we review the advancements developed so far highlighting differences and similarities with the single chromophore treatment. Finally, we outline the important limitations and challenges that still need to be tackled to reach a complete and accurate picture of their photoinduced properties and dynamics.
The synergistic relation between the technological progress in
spectroscopic techniques and the advancement of the theoretical methods,
coupled with the improvement in the available computational capabilities,
have produced a tremendous boost in our understanding of multichromophoric
systems, especially of biological origin. Ultrafast spectroscopic
techniques developed in the last decades have been able to gather
a huge amount of information on the response of these systems to light-induced
perturbations and, indirectly, on the details of the excited-state
dynamics. The possibility to explore events that occur at shorter
and shorter time scales has revealed new phenomena and opened new
questions: What processes of chemical and biological significance
take place in the subpicosecond region?(1)What is the nature of the created electronic states?
Are they delocalized over multiple chromophoric units?(2)What pathways are followed to relax/exploit
the absorbed energy?(3)What is the role of the environment (both as a static scaffold and
as an energy reservoir) in these activated energy transfer processes?(2,3)Eventually, the advent of two-dimensional electronic
spectroscopy
(2DES) allowed to explore coherent phenomena. The observation of long
living beatings in 2DES maps posed new fascinating questions: Are biological systems using a (robust) quantum-coherence pathway
for electronic energy transfer?(4)Did Nature think of it first?(5)Interpreting the outcomes in such complex spectroscopies
is by
no means immediate: overlapping and oscillating signals, energetic
and structural disorder, and the variable strength of the coupling
between the system and its environment make it very difficult to clearly
assign the microscopic origin of the observed spectral features. As
an example, the interpretation of the quantum beating pattern discovered
in 2DES spectra of light-harvesting complexes, initially given as
a signature of wavelike exciton transport, was later challenged by
theoretical models and newer experiments[6] and remains an open ground for discussion.New questions call
for novel and more accurate theoretical modeling.[7,8] On
a parallel track, the continuous evolution of computing power
has allowed for more ab initio computational investigations, which
can support the interpretation of the experiments. In this quickly
evolving landscape of experimental evidence and theoretical interpretation,
quantum chemical methods offer a reliable route toward the understanding
of complex excited-state dynamics in multichromophoric systems.[9,10] This Focus Review aims at surveying the ample body of theoretical
methods that have been developed so far to identify established concepts
and to reveal still open challenges. In particular, the focus will
be on biological systems, which still represent an extremely challenging
problem for modeling as their excited-state relaxation cannot be described
without including the multiple effects of the embedding complex biomatrix
and its dynamics.To graphically summarize this specificity,
in Figure we represent
the multiscale
nature of excited-state formation and relaxation in three multichromophoric
biosystems, two light harvesting (LH) pigment–protein complexes,
namely the Fenna–Matthews–Olson (FMO) complex of green
sulfur bacteria and the major LH complex of purple bacteria (LH2),
and a DNA duplex. These three examples have been selected as representative
of the multichromophoric biosystems family members’ diversity.
FMO (as most of the LH complexes) can be seen as a rather rigid system
(within the context of biosystems), with chromophores at a relatively
large distance, presenting separated excited states with relatively
long lifetimes and harmonic potential energy surfaces (PES). In some
cases, however, LH complexes display much smaller interchromophores
distances (as it happens in LH2), and the resulting excited-states
can present characteristics in between standard LH complexes and the
other type of multichromophoric biosystems, namely nucleic acids.
These are extremely flexible systems, in which different conformations
control different relaxation pathways. Localized, delocalized, and
charge transfer (CT) states are all present at the same time. States
lifetime are ultrashort, and PESs are all but harmonic.
Figure 1
Multiscale
description of excited state nature and dynamics in
multichromophoric systems. The Fenna–Matthews–Olson
(FMO) complex of green sulfur bacteria, the LH2 complex of purple
bacteria, and the DNA duplex are shown here as three remarkable, representative
examples. “Left-to-right”: path to reduce the system
complexity into smaller (tractable) pieces. “Right-to-left”:
path that brings from the single site properties to the aggregate
properties.
Multiscale
description of excited state nature and dynamics in
multichromophoric systems. The Fenna–Matthews–Olson
(FMO) complex of green sulfur bacteria, the LH2 complex of purple
bacteria, and the DNA duplex are shown here as three remarkable, representative
examples. “Left-to-right”: path to reduce the system
complexity into smaller (tractable) pieces. “Right-to-left”:
path that brings from the single site properties to the aggregate
properties.The diversity between
LH and DNA/RNA systems is reflected in the
completely different fate of the light activation. In nucleic acids,
the excess energy is dissipated as quickly as possible to prevent
photodamage. On the contrary, the light harvesting apparatus of photosynthetic
organisms has evolved to control the transport of excitation energy
and its conversion into chemical energy. These behaviors will be reconsidered
at the end of the review, where these two groups of systems will be
compared in terms of their possible modeling.The scheme reported
in Figure can be
read both from left to right and from right
to left. On the one hand (left-to-right path), the goal is to investigate
the behavior of complex multichromophoric systems to unveil their
structural–functional properties. To do so, as usual, it is
necessary to reduce the system complexity into smaller
(tractable) pieces. The challenge here is to introduce sensible approximations,
which preserve the physicochemical properties of the whole system
while making it possible to perform calculations on it. This reductionist
approach brings one to the computation of very accurate properties
of single molecule or small groups of molecules, a task that quantum
chemistry is nowadays able to tackle in many cases of interest. On
the other hand (right-to-left path), the theoretician should reconnect
the various pieces of this multiscale modeling, by introducing, at
each step, additional complexity: the single site properties, computed
in their environment, and the intersite coupling, are used to access
aggregate properties (for example through the Frenkel Exciton model),
and transport between exciton states has also to be modeled by including
system vibrations. CT states may also be necessarily added to the
description, and a sampling over many possible system conformations
is usually required to reproduce ensemble characteristics. In this
process of connecting the various scales of the problem one may realize
that some of the introduced approximations are inadequate: the approximation
of considering harmonic electronic potential energy surfaces (PES)
can be dramatically wrong in the case of DNA bases. Attention should
therefore be paid in the use of techniques in system with different
characteristics, which can never be blindly transferred from one to
the other.For the following presentation, we have selected
the “right-to-left
path” but the different sections can be alternatively read
in the reverse order, thus reconstructing the “left-to-right
path”.
The Single-Site Problem
The necessary balance between accuracy and scalability of computer
simulations generally prevents the possibility of a direct investigation
of all the atoms of a large and complex biosystem within a single
quantum mechanical region. To overcome this important limitation,
the system is commonly partitioned into the site and
an environment. In the present context, we define
a site to be a fragment, a molecule, or a group of
molecules that can be homogeneously described at the QM level of theory.
The environment, instead, is what remains beyond the QM site system
and is here treated at the classical level. There are many strategies
developed so far to integrate QM and classical descriptions for the
study of excited-state formation and relaxation. These will be presented
and commented in the following subsections for the single-site problem,
whereas their generalization to multichromophoric systems is established
in the next section, where a discussion of what can be taken and what
should instead be left (or further approximated) is also reported.
The Quantum Chemical Methods
The
extensive body of quantum chemical methods designed for the computation
of excited states[11] spans from single-configurational
procedures,[12] such as the CI-singles (CIS),
CI-singles and doubles (CISD), and coupled-cluster (CC),[13,14] to multiconfigurational treatments[15] as
the complete (or restricted) active space self-consistent field, CASSCF
(or RASSCF),[16,17] usually employed in tandem with
second-order perturbative corrections (CASPT2 or RASPT2). Another
family of methods is included under the denomination propagator approaches,[18] e.g., Green’s function, equation-of-motion,
and algebraic–diagrammatic–construction (ADC) methodologies,
which do not require to compute the wave functions of individual states
to obtain excitation energies and transition probabilities. Among
them, the combination of Bethe Salpeter equation with the GW approximation
(GW/BSE)[19,20] represents a promising method.[21,22] The quality of these methods relies on the type of reference wave
function. Finally, time dependent density functional theory (TDDFT)
is nowadays among the most popular approaches, also because of its
black-box fashion.[23] DFT/MRCI,[24] which combines DFT with multireference configuration
interaction (MRCI), has shown great efficiency for calculating excited
states.[25]A single technique appropriate
for all the photophysical problems of interest does not exist: there
is always a trade-off between price and performance. TDDFT can treat
rather large systems, with very accurate results, but significant
issues have been raised about its capability of describing CT states[26] and double excitations. Moreover, near degeneracies
in the ground state cause difficulties in TDDFT, given the single-reference
character of the ground state.[27]CC-based methods have proven to be the most accurate for small
and medium size molecules in situations where the HF reference is
a fair approximation for the ground state. The CASSCF/CASPT2 methodology
is considered a reference for its accuracy and capability of describing
in a balanced way states that are multiconfigurational in nature,
and as such it represents the state-of-the-art method for the computation
of excited-state properties in generic molecular systems. Nonetheless,
it requires an accurate selection of the orbitals to be included in
the active space (which is a completely non-black box procedure),
and the cost of such computations rapidly increases with the system
size.
The Classical Models for the Environment
Many different strategies have been proposed to integrate a classical
model of the environment within a quantum chemical description of
a solvated or more generally embedded molecule.The most straightforward
and also the most computationally efficient approach is to reduce
the environment to an infinite continuum dielectric, which coarse
grains all the atomistic degrees of freedom of the environment in
an average picture represented by a dielectric constant. Among the
many possible realizations of continuum models, the one which projects
the polarization of the whole dielectric only on the surface of the
cavity chosen to contain the QM system, has obtained the largest success.
The polarization is here represented by an “apparent”
(e.g., induced) surface charge (ASC) distribution and discretized
in terms of point charges by introducing a surface mesh.[28] The ASC distribution, in turn, influences the
QM system, effectively describing mutual polarization between the
QM system and the environment. In this framework, the definition of
the cavity (and its surface) represents the most important adjustable
parameter. In the most effective implementation of the model, the
cavity is defined in terms of interlocking spheres centered on the
atoms (or selected groups of atoms) of the QM molecule.Because
of their simplicity, the implementation of continuum models
in electronic structure codes is extremely fast: this, when combined
with the easiness of use and the very good ratio between accuracy
and computational cost, explains why they are the most used approaches
to introduce environment effects in quantum chemistry. Of course,
the characteristic of completely neglecting the atomistic nature of
the environment can lead to poor descriptions, especially when specific
interactions between the QM and selected atoms of the environment
are important in determining the property or the process of interest.
Continuum models can oversimplify very heterogeneous environments.
Finally, its unique advantage of giving an implicitly averaged description
of the environment can turn into a limit when its fluctuations occur
on the same time scale as the investigated process, preventing a mean
field approximation. In all these cases, a much better strategy consists
in introducing an atomistic description of the environment.This detailed (atomistic) description of the environment is achieved
through molecular mechanics (MM) force fields, and the resulting QM/MM
approach has been formulated in various ways with respect to the type
and the number of interactions explicitly included in the Hamiltonian
determining the QM molecule.[29] In the “mechanical
embedding” QM/MM approach, these interactions are null, as
they are all rewritten in terms of additional MM terms. As such, this
approach is only applicable if one is not interested in the effect
of the environment on the electronic density of the molecule (and
all the related properties), and it is therfore completely useless
in the present context of photoinduced processes. In the “electrostatic
embedding” formulation of QM/MM, the effects of the MM atoms
are included in the Hamiltonian of the QM system as a one-electron
operator having exactly the same form of the electron–nuclei
Coulomb interaction. This formulation, more accurate and complete
then the previous one, is nowadays the most commonly used. More refined
formulations, which go beyond the electrostatic embedding, are those
that include polarization effects in the MM part and/or add explicit
operators for the QM-classical dispersive and repulsive interactions.
While the latter extension is still not widespread, the polarizable
reformulation of QM/MM, known as “polarizable embedding”,
is becoming more and more widespread. Different alternative formulations
of the polarizable embedding have been successfully applied to describe
spectroscopies of embedded molecules and photoinduced processes, where
mutual polarization between the QM and the classical system can lead
to non-negligible effects.[30−34]Both QM/continuum and QM/MM approaches, in their different
flavors,
have been extended to describe excited-state properties and processes.
In this context, the dynamical response of the environment is characterized
by different time scales: the inertial component of the polarization,
which is due to motions and rearrangements of the environment atoms,
will present a much slower response time than the electronic component,
which is instead characterized by an almost instantaneous reaction
of the electronic density. To translate this into classical models,
continuum or atomistic, these two fast and slow components have to
be explicitly defined and will respond differently to the fast change
of electronic state in the QM system during, e.g., an absorption or
an emission process: only the fast component is allowed to completely
and immediately relax following the quick change in the QM electronic
density, while the other component will be kept frozen in its initial
configuration. This is exactly what is described by the so-called
nonequilibrium regime. In continuum models, this is achieved by separating
the optical component of the dielectric constant from the full (static)
one: the apparent charges will also split into a dynamical and a inertial
component which are allowed to react differently to fast changes in
the QM system. The same separation is naturally obtained in polarizable
QM/MM: the nuclei are explicitly considered and represent the slow
component, while the fast component is accounted for through the polarizability.
On the other hand, electrostatic embedding can only account for the
slow response, because MM charges are fixed at the positions of the
classical nuclei.
The Potential Energy Surfaces
In
the Born–Oppenheimer approximation, we can model the process
of a chromophore interacting with light with a nuclear wavepacket
moving from the bottom of the ground-state (GS) potential energy surface
to one of the possible excited-state (ES) PESs. The Franck–Condon
principle establishes what are the vibrational levels which are likely
to be populated in the process: these must be instantaneously compatible
with the nuclear positions of the vibrational level of the molecule
in the starting electronic state.Most commonly, the nuclear
degrees of freedom are approximated as harmonic oscillators. In a
further simplification, called displaced harmonic oscillator (DHO),
the coupling between the electronic and nuclear degrees of freedom
is assumed to be linear (Figure ). The excited-state PES has thus the same curvature
as the ground-state PES but a shifted equilibrium position. Within
this model, all the parameters describing the various PESs can be
readily computed at the initial geometry: a frequency computation
in the GS minimum gives normal modes and frequencies, while the energy
gradient on the ES PES at the Franck–Condon point is directly
linked to the displacement between the two PESs minima as well as
to the vibronic coupling along each normal mode. This frequency-dependent
vibronic coupling can be exactly mapped into a spectral density function,here written on the basis of normal-mode frequencies
ω, and the Huang–Rhys factors S, which describe the dimensionless
displacement of the excited-state PES along the kth normal mode. The total strength of the vibronic coupling is measured
by the reorganization energy .
Figure 2
(a) Drawing of GS and ES PESs, highlighting
important points and
transitions. The displaced harmonic oscillator (DHO) model is shown
in the gray shadowed inset. (b) Relation between the energy gap fluctuation
autocorrelation function C(t), the
spectral density J(ω), and the DHO model (FT
stands for Fourier Transform). The mode responsible for the high frequency
peak in the spectral density (highlighted in red) is also depicted
on the top of the molecular structure and highlighted in C(t). Similarly, a low frequency mode is highlighted
in green and connected to the slow motion of the biomatrix embedding
the chromophore. The peaks in J(ω) have position
determined by the mode frequency and height determined by the strength
of the coupling to the electronic excitation (the two parameters,
ω and de, of the DHO model). The
effect of the different modes (high and low frequency) on the linear
spectrum is shown on the side of the respective parabolae: high frequency
modes produce a band structure, while low frequency modes are responsible
for the so-called homogeneous broadening.
(a) Drawing of GS and ES PESs, highlighting
important points and
transitions. The displaced harmonic oscillator (DHO) model is shown
in the gray shadowed inset. (b) Relation between the energy gap fluctuation
autocorrelation function C(t), the
spectral density J(ω), and the DHO model (FT
stands for Fourier Transform). The mode responsible for the high frequency
peak in the spectral density (highlighted in red) is also depicted
on the top of the molecular structure and highlighted in C(t). Similarly, a low frequency mode is highlighted
in green and connected to the slow motion of the biomatrix embedding
the chromophore. The peaks in J(ω) have position
determined by the mode frequency and height determined by the strength
of the coupling to the electronic excitation (the two parameters,
ω and de, of the DHO model). The
effect of the different modes (high and low frequency) on the linear
spectrum is shown on the side of the respective parabolae: high frequency
modes produce a band structure, while low frequency modes are responsible
for the so-called homogeneous broadening.The spectral density can be evaluated knowing only the GS
nuclear
trajectory, as the autocorrelation function C(t) of the excitation energy fluctuations (Figure b). If the ground-state trajectory
is described classically, one applies a quantum correction to the
Fourier transform of the classical autocorrelation function Ccl(t):[35]This
description allows consideration of all the vibrational modes
in one function comprising the motion of the environment surrounding
the chromophores. Even though the spectral density only describes
linear coupling to the vibrational degrees of freedom, it can be used
to approximately map any kind of vibronic coupling to an infinite
set of harmonic oscillators.[36]In
real systems, PESs can be much more complex than the previously
described independent harmonic wells (Figure a). They can have arbitrarily complicated
shapes, and the Born–Oppenheimer approximation may be violated
in regions where the electronic states become too close: internal
conversion (IC) or intersystem crossing (ISC) may take place, respectively,
between states of the same or different spin multiplicities. As the
evaluation of the entire hypersurface is an impossible task, one usually
computes only significant points along the so-called
minimum energy path (MEP), such as minima, saddle points, barriers,
and crossings between the states. These can be located by suitable
optimization algorithms.A general protocol (valid for all kinds
of valence excited states)
employed for that purpose relies on CASSCF determined geometries,
with energetics refined by including dynamic electron correlation
with CASPT2 single-point computations on the specific nuclear configurations.
Attention should be paid here as state swapping may occur when the
CASPT2 correction is applied to structures determined at the CASSCF
level. Moreover, in order to describe the entire reaction path, the
selection of the active orbitals requires them to describe the complete
reaction mechanism, as the active space must not change along the
reaction coordinate.If one focuses on states for which TDDFT
is known to work properly,
the same kind of mapping can be performed much more easily and rapidly
at this level of theory. In practice, the use of TDDFT follows the
same caveats outlined above on double excitations and charge-transfer
states. Importantly, even if the Franck–Condon region is accurately
described by TDDFT, at other geometries the excited states might acquire
charge-transfer or doubly excited character and would be poorly described.[23,27] Finally, a linear-response approach such as TDDFT cannot correctly
describe the regions where one excited state crosses the ground state.[27]
The Excited State Dynamics
The mapping
of the PESs provides important structural information, and the computation
of spectroscopic signals at selected points along the reaction path
gives snapshots of the system evolution. Accounting for the nuclear
motion is nonetheless important, as the addition of the nuclear kinetic
energy can change the reaction mechanism deduced from the sole mapping:
it can for example open new deactivation paths, allowing the molecule
to visit regions of the PES unaccessible for a “cold”
wave packet. Moreover, the nuclear momentum enters in the evaluation
of the terms that describe the nonadiabatic behavior of the system
dynamics in proximity of PESs crossings, the so-called nonadiabatic
couplings. The proper description of the system relaxation from the
initially excited state to the final product state(s), and of the
related evolution of the spectroscopic signatures, therefore calls
for suitable modeling(s) of the nuclear dynamics.The nuclear
dynamics can be incorporated at various levels of approximation[37,38] (from the most accurate and computationally expensive, to the less
accurate and cheap methodologies), employing:Quantum Dynamics (QD) methods, which
explicitly solve the time-dependent Schrödinger equation for
the time propagation of the quantum nuclear wave packet on the coupled
PESs and can provide numerically exact results. Multiconfiguratinal
TD Hartree (MCTDH)[39] is considered as a
reference QD method, providing high accuracy PESs and nonadiabatic
couplings are given in input. In this respect, a major drawback in
these methodologies is that they require precalculated PESs, necessarily
restricting their applicability domain to a few electronic states
and/or few effective (important) coordinates.Mixed Quantum Classical Dynamics (MQC)
methods are based on a separation between quantum and classical system
degrees of freedom. In most of MQC approaches, electrons are treated
quantum mechanically, while the nuclei move according to classical
equations of motion. To enforce self-consistency, the quantum and
classical subsystems are connected through nonadiabatic coupling terms.
The MQC split enables the treatment of realistic molecular systems
because of the reduced computational costs. Moreover, the MQC treatment
allows computing of potential energies, energy gradients, and couplings
on-the-fly during the trajectory integration (local approximation),
with a significant impact on computational costs because precomputed
multidimensional surfaces are not required anymore. The most established
methods are Ehrenfest dynamics (ED), trajectory surface hopping (TSH),[40,41] and multiple spawning (MS).[38,42] In the first method,
the classical nuclei move on a mean potential given by the weighted
average of the PESs according to their coupling; in the second method,
a swarm of classical nuclear trajectories evolves on an adiabatic
surface with the possibility to jump to other surfaces; in the MS
method, the semiclassical dynamics of nuclear wavepackets is captured
by classically driven Gaussian functions, and the classical nuclear
trajectories are used as an auxiliary grid for a quantum propagation
of the nuclei. While the classical localization of nuclear trajectories
allows treating realistic systems, it also makes it impossible to
provide a description of quantum phenomena depending on global features.
These purely nuclear quantum effects, as, for instance, tunneling
and coherent spectral oscillations can be partially recovered in the
MS treatment.
The Spectroscopic
Investigation
The
largest part of the knowledge we have about photochemical and photophysical
properties of molecules comes from the combination of steady-state
and time-resolved techniques. While steady-state spectroscopy delivers
information about the energetic positions and probabilities of the
observed transitions (typically from ground-state stable configurations/minima),
time-resolved spectroscopy is able to provide kinetic information.
Among the time-resolved techniques for the study of ultrafast electronic
dynamics, pump–probe (PP) spectroscopy is the most widely used.[44] In a PP experiment, a fraction of the molecules
is promoted by a first (strong) pulse, called pump pulse, to a resonant electronic excited state. After a time delay
τ, a weaker probe pulse is sent to the sample
to monitor the pump-induced changes in sample absorption. A difference
absorption spectrum (ΔA) is then obtained by
subtracting the absorption spectrum of the sample in the ground state
to the absorption spectrum of the excited sample. The information
contained in ΔA(λ,τ) comes from
ground-state bleaching (GSB), stimulated emission (SE), and excited-state
absorption (ESA) contributions. Very short laser pulses allow to follow
extremely fast phenomena but at the cost of a reduced spectral selectivity.The 2DES technique can be seen as an extension of PP: in PP, the
evolution of the initially excited sample is monitored over a frequency
(detection energy) and a time axis (delay between pump and probe pulses);
in 2DES one resolves the signal over an additional coordinate, namely
the excitation energy. This improvement allows revealing of connections
between optical excitations at a given frequency, and the signals
they create over a wide range of frequencies, disentangling possible
overlapping signals, and eventually giving a direct view of the (potentially)
multiple molecular transitions and competitive photo induced processes.
Moreover, the introduction of an additional pump pulse,
with a controlled time delay with the other pump pulse, makes it possible
to circumvent the trade-off between time and frequency accuracy.[43] The relation that holds between PP and 2DES
is explained in Figure .
Figure 3
(a) Pulse setup and time delays in 2DES (noncollinear geometry,
which allows having a background-free signal). (b) Computer spectroscopic
simulations are based on the system response function R. (c) Relation between PP and 2DES and wealth of information gained
in 2DES at different waiting times t2.
Excitation axis, only resolved in 2D, is labeled with ω1, while detection axis, present in both techniques, is labeled
with ω3. In 2DES, two types of peaks are distinguished:
diagonal peaks that mirror the linear absorption spectrum and thus
highlight the bright transitions from the ground state which lay within
the considered spectral window (GSB), and cross-peaks, displaced outside
the diagonal. At t2 = 0, cross-peaks reveal
possible SE on the red side of the bright transitions, which may red-shift
and/or disappear while the system evolves along increasing waiting
times (t2 > 0). Peaks of opposite sign
(with respect to GSB and SE) on both diagonal or off-diagonal positions
can demonstrate the presence of ESA signals and the appearance of
new ESA features at increasing waiting-time t2 can indicate the production of new states through, e.g.,
internal conversion or intersystem crossing. The ratio of the diagonal
to antidiagonal widths reflects the degree of inhomogeneous versus
homogeneous broadening, which, in contrast with linear absorption,
are here resolved independently.[43]
(a) Pulse setup and time delays in 2DES (noncollinear geometry,
which allows having a background-free signal). (b) Computer spectroscopic
simulations are based on the system response function R. (c) Relation between PP and 2DES and wealth of information gained
in 2DES at different waiting times t2.
Excitation axis, only resolved in 2D, is labeled with ω1, while detection axis, present in both techniques, is labeled
with ω3. In 2DES, two types of peaks are distinguished:
diagonal peaks that mirror the linear absorption spectrum and thus
highlight the bright transitions from the ground state which lay within
the considered spectral window (GSB), and cross-peaks, displaced outside
the diagonal. At t2 = 0, cross-peaks reveal
possible SE on the red side of the bright transitions, which may red-shift
and/or disappear while the system evolves along increasing waiting
times (t2 > 0). Peaks of opposite sign
(with respect to GSB and SE) on both diagonal or off-diagonal positions
can demonstrate the presence of ESA signals and the appearance of
new ESA features at increasing waiting-time t2 can indicate the production of new states through, e.g.,
internal conversion or intersystem crossing. The ratio of the diagonal
to antidiagonal widths reflects the degree of inhomogeneous versus
homogeneous broadening, which, in contrast with linear absorption,
are here resolved independently.[43]To simulate these spectroscopies
and explain their outcomes, a
field-matter Hamiltonian is introduced, and the molecular coupling
to the radiation field is usually expressed as , where is the dipole operator of the QM system
and (t) is the classical
incoming field (semiclassical treatment). Time-dependent perturbation
theory is usually applied (in terms of H′(t)), and different orders of the perturbative expansion
give rise to different kind of signals: linear techniques are studied
with first-order signals, while PP and 2DES generate third-order signals.A density matrix approach for describing the system changes during
and between the interaction with the pulses is usually preferred to
a wave function based approach, as the density matrix formalism allows
including the fluctuations and dissipation processes that occur due
to the interaction between the system and the environment. The time
dependent polarization induced by the interaction of the ensemble
of molecules with the incoming radiation is the quantity of interest
for the simulation of spectroscopy, as it gives rise to the measured
signal of spectroscopic experiments.First-order (third-order)
polarization connects the incident radiation
field to the so-called system response function,
whose expressions are given by[45]where is the equilibrium density matrix (i.e.,
the density matrix prior to any field interaction) and , represents the interaction of the QM system
with the laser. The superoperator drives the evolution of the density matrix
for a time t, in the absence of an external field: .The response function R(1) (R(3)) summarizes the evolution of the first-order
(third-order) perturbed system in the following way (by reading eqs and 4 from right to left): (i) starts from the equilibrium density matrix , (ii) interacts
with the laser via the
dipole superoperator μ×, (iii) evolves the perturbed
density matrix with according to the field-free
molecular Hamiltonian H0 for a time t, (iv) repeats
the above two steps as prescribed by the considered techniques, and
(v) computes the macroscopic polarization with the perturbed and evolved
density matrix.From a practical point of view, the necessary
ingredients to simulate
spectroscopic experiments are the energies of the system’s
manifold of states, the transition dipoles between the states, and
the line-width broadening. The latter can be provided phenomenologically
or by explicitly accounting for the system–bath interaction
through the spectral density associated with the various transitions.
The cumulant expansion of Gaussian fluctuations (CGF)[45] method is a mean to describe the effect of the environment
on the transition line-shape beyond the phenomenological treatment.
It is exact for a bath characterized by Gaussian fluctuations (and
in the absence of transport of excitation between the various states
of the system). Within this model, linear and nonlinear spectra are
computed through the line shape function g(t), which is directly obtained from the spectral density:[45,46]Population
relaxation can be included at some approximate level,
usually by assuming a separation of time scales between the bath fluctuations
and the transport processes[45] or relying
on a higher level description of the density matrix evolution which
explicitly evolve the coupled electronic and nuclear DOFs.[47]
From Single-Site to Multichromophoric
Systems
In the previous section, we have highlighted the
achievements of
the quantum-chemistry based modeling of systems made of a single QM
unit (the site) embedded in a classical environment. To what extent
can we use such achievements to describe systems where the number,
and dimensions, of the QM units is too large to treat homogeneously
the entire system? What should be taken of the site description, and
what should instead be abandoned?On the one hand, a subdivision
of the aggregate into a system and
environment part can still be performed, and the coupling between
the electronic and the nuclear degrees of freedom can still be accounted
for in order to describe the system dynamics after photoexcitation.
On the other hand, in these systems one has to consider, in principle,
a large number of electronic states and of nuclear degrees of freedom.
This, coupled to the size of the system, forces the reformulation
of some of the previously introduced concepts and the introduction
of additional approximations:Quantum Chemical Description: The multichromophoric
nature of the system implies a too large number of atoms to be treated
homogeneously, and the electronic Hamiltonian is generally reconstructed
in terms of independent but interacting units. However, the nature
and the dimension of the most proper units is not unequivocally defined
and it might not coincide with the single chromophores.Environment: The classical models used
for single site systems can be generalized to multichromophoric systems,
but now their responsive nature becomes much more important, as the
QM Hamiltonian explicitly includes interunit couplings which can significantly
change if the environment is allowed to polarize. Moreover, the issue
of the sampling of the environment is even more delicate, as now each
chromophore has its own “local” environment and the
interpigment couplings connect all of these environments.Coupling between Electronic and
Nuclear Degrees
of Freedom: The excited states of a multichromophoric aggregate
are coupled to many nuclear coordinates of several chromophores, which
complicates the description of their PESs. The dependence upon the
intramolecular nuclear coordinates can still be included by considering
the vibronic coupling of each site with the DHO model, restricting
the form of the total multichromophoric Hamiltonian (see section ). This assumption
greatly simplifies the problem, as many quantities of interest can
be computed analytically. However, real potential wells can drastically
deviate from the harmonic approximation (as it happens, e.g., in DNA).
Moreover, local baths of different units can be correlated, and the
interunit couplings can be modulated by large intermolecular motions.Excited State Dynamics:
Contrary to
the previously described dynamics, which occurs within a single site, in multichromophoric systems the relevant photophysical
processes span different sites. Excitation energy transfer (EET) and/or
transfer of electrons (electron transfer, ET) among chromophores have
to be modeled. Several theories have been developed, but their range
of applicability is generally limited due to the specific regimes
that each theory assumes.Spectroscopy: Spectroscopy data becomes
congested of contributions coming from the different chromophore and
from their mutual interaction. Theoretical simulations are here even
more necessary in order to disentangle different contributions and
interpret recorded spectra.
The Quantum
Chemical Description
The excited states of a multichromophoric
system (such as a pigment–protein
LH complex) may be effectively described introducing the Frenkel exciton
model: one performs QC computations on single sites, i.e., subregions
of the entire system, and computes site–site coupling terms
to reconstruct the multichromophoric manifold of electronic states.In the standard formulation of the model, the electronic excited
states of the entire system are expanded on a basis of diabatic states
|i⟩, which represent an excitation localized
on a single chromophoric unit:It is commonly assumed that the states |i⟩ are Hartree products of the excited state of one
chromophore with the ground states of all other chromophores (|0,···,1,0,···⟩).
Physically, this corresponds to neglecting the GS exchange interactions
between different chromophores. Consistently, the global ground state |g⟩ is represented
as the Hartree product of all chromophores’ ground states.The electronic Hamiltonian of the entire system is then written
on the basis of states |i⟩, namely:where are
the excitation energies of the isolated
chromophores (site energies), and V are the electronic couplings between
the different chromophores’ states. Eg is the energy of the ground state, which is taken as the
zero of the energy scale whenever one is only interested in the excitation
energies. The electronic energies and coefficients of the expansion
in eq are obtained
by diagonalization of the Hamiltonian matrix. Here, for the sake of
simplicity, we have assumed that each chromophore i contributes with only one excited state to the diabatic basis set,
but the essential details of the model do not change when considering
more than one excited state per chromophore.The power of the
exciton model lies in the possibility of computing
its parameters and V only from calculations
of single-chromophore properties. In
particular, the electronic coupling V between two excited states localized on different
chromophores can be very well approximated as the following Coulomb
interaction:[48]where ρ0(R) (ρ0(R′))
is the transition density corresponding to the excitation
at site i (j). The integral in eq can be evaluated numerically
or analytically using a basis set expansion.[49] An alternative derivation through natural transition orbitals has
also been proposed.[50,51] Approximated forms of this interaction,
including the point-dipole approximation (PDA) and a point-charge
expansion, have found widespread use.[52] The PDA coupling is the first nonzero multipole order of the interaction
(eq ), and can be expressed
aswhere μ is the transition dipole for transition i or j, R is the vector distance between the centers of transitions i and j, with magnitude R. It is well-known that the point-dipole
approximation breaks down at close interchromophoric separation, namely,
when R is smaller than
the dimensions of the chromophores. Nonetheless, because of the simplicity
of its implementation, the PDA has been widely employed to compute
Coulomb couplings, even outside of its range of applicability.[52]An alternative simple expression for the
Coulomb coupling is the
expansion on atomic charges. The densities ρ0(R) can be approximated by a set of point charges
{qαTr} centered on the chromophore’s nuclei.
Within this expression, the integral in eq is replaced by a double sum:where indices α and β
run on the
atoms of i and j. The transition
charges qαTr can be obtained through a population analysis
of the transition density ρ0(R). In analogy to the parametrization of classical force fields,
the transition charges can be fitted to match the electrostatic potential
generated by the transition density, in the so-called TrEsp method.[53]It is possible to think at the exciton
model as a simplified CIS,
in which the molecular orbitals are now occupied and virtual orbitals
localized on the sites: CIS configurations will consider transitions
both within the sites (locally excited, LE, states) and between the
sites (charge transfer, CT, states).The excitonic ansatz of the standard exciton model
(eq ) only considers
LE states, namely, states where the excitation is localized on single
chromophores. As such, it neglects all the CT states |i+j–⟩, where
the hole and electron reside on two different chromophores i and j. Generalizations of the Hamiltonian
(eq ) to include all
CT configurations are however possible:Here, denotes the energy of the CT state |i+j–⟩, is the coupling between a CT state and
a LE state, and is the coupling between two different
CT
states.The Coulomb expression of eq is not valid for couplings involving CT states.
The coupling
between a LE state and a CT state can still be computed from the properties
of the noninteracting chromophores, although it requires computing
the Fock matrix elements for each pair of chromophores.[54] Similarly, the energy of a CT state can be computed
by knowing the orbital energies of chromophores i and j and Coulomb and exchange integrals.The number of CT states in a system of N chromophores
is in the order of N2 (while the number
of exciton states grows linearly with N). This raises
the complexity of the CT-extended exciton model, and the number of
couplings to compute. The CT-extended exciton model would thus have
the same complexity as a CIS performed on the entire system. However,
only those couplings between states that have the hole or the electron
on the same chromophore are nonzero. Moreover, the CT states where
hole and electron reside on distant chromophores can be neglected.
This makes the charge-transfer extended exciton model still computationally
more tractable than a calculation on the entire system, especially
for effectively one-dimensional systems.[55] Moreover, separating locally excited and charge-transfer states
can be an effective strategy to correct for the unbalanced treatment
of CT states by TDDFT methods.[54]An alternative approach to the calculation of CT energies and couplings
is based on the diabatization of the electronic Hamiltonian of dimeric
units. This strategy is particularly effective when selecting only
few CT states, or when chromophore pairs are related by symmetry.[55,56]
The Environment Effects
In the single
site section we have summarized the most common approaches used in
quantum chemistry to include the effects of the environment. As a
matter of fact, the same approaches can be (and have been) extended
to multichromophoric systems and used to calculate the excitonic parameters
(site energies and couplings) needed to build the excitonic Hamiltonian
of the embedded system.[10] Both continuum
and MM classical models can be applied to describe the changes induced
by the environment on the excitation energies of the single chromophoric
units, exactly in the same way they are used for single site systems.
Some specificities are instead needed to predict the “correct”
coupling between embedded chromophores.The electronic couplings
are affected by the environment through two mechanisms. First, the
environment can change both the geometrical and the electronic structure
of the chromophores and modify their transition properties, i.e.,
transition dipoles and transition densities. These changes will be
“implicitly” reflected in a change of the Coulomb coupling
(eq ), which will be
generally enhanced due to the electrostatic effect of the environment.
The second effect is due to the polarizable environment, which mediates
the interaction among chromophores’ excitations.[57] The resulting “explicit” effect
generally reduces the magnitude of the direct (Coulomb) coupling.
For this reason, it is common to say that the coupling is “screened”
by the environment.All QM/classical methods outlined in section automatically
give the first implicit
effect within the same formalism used to get the “new”
site energies. It is instead more critical to include the explicit
effect. The simplest way is to introduce a screening factor s such that V = sVc, where Vc is the direct electronic coupling between chromophores with the
implicit effect taken into consideration. The screening factor s can be related to the inverse of the optical dielectric
constant ϵ∞, which is generally approximated
with the square of the refractive index of the medium. For a refractive
index of 1.4 (typical for a hydrophobic region of protein environments),
the screening factor is ∼0.5, namely, the electronic coupling
is reduced by a factor ∼2. This is indeed what was originally
proposed by Förster in his famous model for EET (vide infra)
where the PDA coupling of eq was divided by ϵ∞.[58,59] Within this approximation, the screening neither depends on the
interacting chromophores nor on their relative orientation and distance.
Moreover, at short distances, the dielectric medium can be excluded
from the intermolecular region, leading to more complex effects.[60,61] In particular cases, this can also enhance the coupling.[57] To achieve a more accurate description, the
apparent surface charges (ASC) formulation of continuum models we
have described in section can be introduced. Within this framework, an explicit coupling
term has to be added to the direct one. This additional term becomes[49]Conceptually, the electronic transition in chromophore k drives a response in the polarizable medium, which, in
turn, affects the transition in chromophore j. It
is important to note that the apparent charges q are calculated using the optical permittivity
of the medium, in order to account for the fact that only the electronic
component of the polarization can respond (nonequilibrium regime).
A very similar strategy is used in the Poisson–TrEsp method,[62] an extension of the TrEsp method described in section .If one
wants to keep the atomistic detail of the environment, MM
descriptions can be used as well. However, the MM model has also to
be polarizable to generate the analogue of VASC. An expression has been proposed based on the induced dipole (ID)
formulation of polarizable embedding. Within this approach, an atomic
polarizability is added to the fixed charge to describe each atom
of the MM environment and the explicit contribution to the couping
becomes[30]where the transition density ρ0 induces a response in the environment which is represented
by the induced dipoles μ. As in
the case of the QM/continuum, ρ0 here is also calculated self-consistently with the polarization
of the environment. A mixed continuum/atomistic strategy has also
been proposed:[63] in this case, VASC and VMMPol sum up
and both terms are obtained in a fully polarizable scheme.Before
concluding this section on environment effects, it is important
to introduce a general problem that will be better analyzed at the
end of this Review. Namely, in the case of any atomistic description,
the QM–environment interactions, particularly those at short-range,
depend critically on the configuration of the environment. Therefore,
several configurations of the whole system need to be taken into consideration
to get a correct sampling. Obviously, this sampling is not needed
when a continuum approach is employed because it implicitly gives
a configurationally averaged effect due to the use of macroscopic
properties.
The Coupling to Vibrations
In the
previous sections, we have considered only the electronic part of
the system Hamiltonian. However, vibronic coupling is fundamental
in determining the excited-state dynamics of a multichromophoric system.When the coupling between excitation and vibrational modes is strong,
the electronic basis used in eq might not be the optimal choice for writing the total Hamiltonian.
When one or few vibrational modes are strongly coupled to the site
excitations, it is possible to include all the relevant vibronic states
in the exciton Hamiltonian, thus treating them on the same level as
the pure electronic states. This vibronic basis bypasses the need
of nonperturbative theories to deal with large vibronic couplings
because the most coupled modes are already included in the “system”
Hamiltonian, while the remaining weakly coupled modes can be safely
treated with perturbative theories.[64]The details of vibronic exciton models are discussed in a recent
review, with a focus on molecular aggregates.[65] Here, we present the main characteristics of the vibronic exciton
Hamiltonian. For simplicity, let us consider a single high-frequency
mode with frequency ω0 coupled to the electronic
excitation. The vibronic exciton Hamiltonian can be expanded on the
basis of the vibronic states of each chromophore, , where is a vector of vibronic quantum numbers
for each chromophore. This basis comprises a single electronic excitation
at site i and multiple vibrational excitations, and
its dimensions grow exponentially with the number of chromophores.[65]Normally, no more than two vibrational
excitations have to be considered
in the basis. In the two-particle basis set, one
considers all the vibronic states where the excitation
is localized on chromophore i, both chromophores i and j are in their excited vibrational
states and v′, while the other chromophores
are in their electronic
and vibrational ground states. Here, (v′) is the vth (v′th) vibrational state of the excited-state (ground-state)
PES of chromophore i (j).The off-diagonal elements of the vibronic exciton Hamiltonian in
the two-particle basis read:where and are the Franck–Condon
integrals
between vibronic states of chromophores i and k. In the DHO model, these integrals have a simple analytical
expression in terms of the Huang–Rhys factors of the harmonic
mode. It can be seen that explicit consideration of vibronic states
scales the effective electronic interaction between two chromophores
by the Franck–Condon integrals of these chromophores. The number
of vibronic states is in principle infinite, but the basis is safely
truncated when Franck–Condon factors become negligible.A further approximation to the vibronic exciton Hamiltonian is
the one-particle basis, in which only one vibrational
excitation is considered for each electronic excitation. For each
chromophore i, its vibronic excited states are considered, whereas all the other chromophores
are in their ground electronic and vibrational state. This approximation
was sufficient to explain the vibronic enhancement of energy transfer
dynamics in a cyanobacterial light-harvesting system.[66]The vibronic exciton Hamiltonian has proven especially
useful for
polyene molecules, which show large Huang–Rhys factors for
a few vibrational modes. Explicit consideration of the carotenoid
high-frequency mode in a simplified two-particle model was needed
to explain ultrafast carotenoid-to-bacteriochlorophyll energy transfer
in the natural antenna complex LH2.[67]An alternative or complementary approach to treat the coupling
with nuclear degrees of freedom, based on the perturbative treatment
of vibronic couplings, is based on the formalism of the spectral density
outlined in section . Within this formalism, the vibronic coupling of each site j is entirely specified by the fluctuations of the excitation
energy . In
line with the perturbative approach,
one can assume that the coefficients of the expansion in eq are essentially independent of
the nuclear degrees of freedom. In this limit, the fluctuations of
the exciton energies E are determined by the fluctuations of the site energies and by the
excitonic coefficients, and the corresponding spectral density is
given bywhere it is also
assumed that the site energy
fluctuations are uncorrelated. This is usually well justified, because
fluctuations in site energy are mostly determined by internal vibrations
of the chromophore, which do not influence the site energies of other
chromophores. Moreover, fluctuations of the electronic couplings have
been assumed to be negligible.[68]In the limit of N chromophores with identical
spectral densities J(ω) = Jsite(ω), the excitonic
spectral density J(ω)
is reduced by a factor , which is always ≤1 and
is smaller
the more the excitation is delocalized. The spectral density of an
excitation perfectly delocalized over N chromophores
is then Jsite(ω)/N. By changing the electronic basis to the adiabatic exciton basis,
the vibronic coupling is thus renormalized. Moreover, the energies
of the exciton states become correlated because now the vibrations
on one chromophore modulate the energies of several exciton states.
Finally, off-diagonal vibronic coupling terms appear in the exciton
basis. These nonadiabatic vibronic coupling terms are responsible
for transitions between different electronic states and therefore
mediate the EET process.
The Excited-State Dynamics
The theoretical
research on the excited state dynamics in multichromophoric systems
has a long history and many different approaches have been proposed
so far. Here, it is convenient to introduce the formalism used in
the open quantum systems field. The starting point is the definition
of the total Hamiltonian as the sum of the electronic Hamiltonian
and two additional terms, referring to the so-called “bath”
(B) and “system–bath” (SB) interaction, respectively.is commonly represented by the
exciton
formulation of eq or 11, whereas the “bath” indicates the
nuclear degrees of freedom within the single chromophoric units and
with the surrounding environment (see Figure ). Now, if the bath is treated quantum-mechanically,
one enters in the formalism of the quantum master equation (QME),
where it is commonly modeled as an infinite set of quantum harmonic
oscillators. The bath and the system are assumed to be distinguishable
and all the needed information can be extracted from the reduced density
operator ρ(t)
obtained after tracing out the bath degrees of freedom. As a matter
of fact, with the term QME we refer to many different theoretical
approaches that can be classified according to the completeness and
the accuracy of the resulting picture. Starting from the first step
of this ladder, one encounters the well-known Förster model
for EET.[58,59]
Figure 4
System, bath, system–bath terms in the
total Hamiltonian . The GS energy Eg is safely assumed
to be zero. and represent, respectively,
nuclear momenta
and coordinates operators; g are the coupling constants between nuclear and electronic
degrees of freedom (linear coupling). The perturbative terms (PT)
that enter in the various transport theories are highlighted in the
colored boxes.
System, bath, system–bath terms in the
total Hamiltonian . The GS energy Eg is safely assumed
to be zero. and represent, respectively,
nuclear momenta
and coordinates operators; g are the coupling constants between nuclear and electronic
degrees of freedom (linear coupling). The perturbative terms (PT)
that enter in the various transport theories are highlighted in the
colored boxes.This framework assumes
that the electronic couplings between site
excitations are small compared to the coupling of the electronic degrees
of freedom with the bath (this assumption is also called “weak
coupling” limit, see Figure ). In this limit, the dynamics can be described with
a system of kinetic equations, whose rate constants describe the transfer
of the excitation energy from one site (the donor j) to the other (the acceptor k), and are given by
the Fermi Golden Rule expression:where V is the electronic
coupling and F(E) and A(E) are the Franck–Condon
weighted density of states (FCWD) for the emission of the jth chromophore and absorption of the kth chromophore. The integral in eq , referred to as the spectral overlap, can be recast using the properties of the Fourier transform:where λ is the
reorganization energy of the donor state, g(t) and g(t) are the line shape
functions of the donor and acceptor, and ω is the difference between their vertical excitation energies.The Förster formulation describes an energy transfer mechanism
occurring by incoherent “hops” between chromophores.[69−72] However, when the electronic coupling increases, the perturbative
Fermi Golden Rule expression is not valid anymore,[68,72] as the electronic coupling tends to delocalize the excitation over
many sites, such as it is observed in DNA or light-harvesting pigment–protein
complexes, giving rise to exciton states.In some conditions,
however, it is still possible to adopt a generalization
of the Förster formulation: this is when the multichromophoric
system can be divided into weakly connected aggregates, each containing
multiple strongly coupled chromophores (their coupling being strong
enough to delocalize the excitation). Within this framework, also
known as Generalized Förster (GF), the EET rate can be recovered
from a generalization of the Förster eq by substituting the local excitation j and k with new “exciton”
states, each delocalized in different aggregates.[73−75] As a result,
the coupling V is replaced
by the effective coupling between excitons L and M, i.e., as , whereas the effective spectral overlap
is expressed through the excitation energy difference ℏω = (E–E), and through the line shape functions (g(t)) and reorganization energies (λ) of the exciton states.A reversed perturbative
formulation is instead needed when it is
not possible to partition the system into weakly interacting components.
In the “strong coupling” regime, the electronic coupling
is included explicitly, while the system–bath interactions
are treated as the perturbation (see eq ). As a result, the excited-state dynamics of the system
consists in relaxation between exciton states instead of hopping between
localized excitations. The corresponding relaxation rate can be expressed
according to the Redfield theory as[68,71]where M and L are two exciton states
and J(ω) is the spectral density
of site j evaluated at the energy gap between exciton
states M and L.The standard
Redfield (sR) rate eq describes a relaxation process where one quantum of
electronic energy ℏω is released to the vibrational degrees of freedom through
the vibronic coupling represented by the spectral density; as such
it cannot treat transfer processes where multiple energy quanta are
involved.[71] A possible correction is represented
by the modified Redfield (mR) theory, where the diagonal part of is included in the zeroth-order Hamiltonian
while the perturbation part includes only the off-diagonal part of (see 4). By treating the diagonal part
of nonperturbatively, bath reorganization
and pure dephasing are no more approximated in this formalism. Moreover,
multiphonon effects are included. Within this framework, the relaxation
rate becomes[68,71,76,77]where V describes the interaction
between the donor and acceptor exciton
in terms of the reorganization energies and the line shape tensors
and their first and second derivatives. This definition is valid for
arbitrary delocalization of the donor and acceptor states. For example,
if the two involved states are localized at the jth and kth sites, then V(t) is constant and reduces to
the square of the interaction energy |V|2, corresponding to a weak coupling
between the localized sites j and k. From this analysis, and the comparison of eq with the expression of the Förster
rate (eq ), a parallelism
appears evident, even though here the “coupling” term V(t) is time-dependent
and cannot be factorized out of the integral. Modified Redfield theory
has been successfully employed to model exciton dynamics in multichromophoric
systems.[78,79] Given its validity for arbitrary mixing
of states, eq has
also been applied to model charge separation in the reaction center
of Photosystem II.[80]In contrast
to the sR, here the system–bath is not supposed
to be weak, but the corresponding displacements of the equilibrium
positions of the nuclear modes are taken to be independent of the
exciton wave function. This means that eq is valid if the exciton delocalization is
controlled by static disorder rather than by a relaxation of the nuclear
degrees of freedom (a phenomenon known as dynamic localization).[68,76,81,82] In the other cases, excited-state dynamics is likely better modeled
by Förster theory, assuming complete localization of the excitation,
or by GF theory, assuming partial localization of the excitation within
excitonic aggregates. Modified Redfield and Generalized Förster
theories can be employed together to model strongly mixed states as
well as weakly connected clusters.[83] This
is the case, for example, of the charge-separation process in Photosystem
II.[84]As said, the applications of
these theoretical models to multichromophoric
systems has a long history that is based on the integration of these
theories with empirical parameters generally taken from experiments
and/or simplified molecular models. For example, a large part of the
application of these theories to light-harvesting pigment–protein
complexes has been based on the use of empirical values for the site
energies in combination with a dipole–dipole approximation
of the electronic couplings still based on empirical estimates of
the transition dipoles.[85] Moreover, empirical
formulations have also been used to define the line shape functions
(g(t)) and the reorganization energies (λ).[78,82,84]Only
in the past few years there has been a shift toward a fully
computational estimate of the required parameters. This evolution
has been made possible by the combination of quantum mechanical descriptions
of the excitonic parameters (site energies and couplings) with classical
molecular dynamics simulations for the derivation of line shape functions
and reorganization energies (see section ). Moreover, the simulation has been further
improved so to explicitly account for the effects of the environment
on all these parameters; in particular, this has been achieved by
the important progresses seen in the development of accurate hybrid
QM/classical approaches that we have described in section .All the methods
described so far, however, are based on some perturbative
formulation which can be safely used only in specific ranges of application.
As a matter of fact, a number of methods have been devised to treat
the quantum dynamics beyond the perturbative formulations. Among various
higher-order methods developed for decades, the hierarchical equations
of motion (HEOM) approach[86−88] has gained popularity recently
and its results are considered as benchmark data by many researchers.[82,83] The HEOM approach is based on the idea that higher-order terms of
the system–bath interactions can be accounted for by introducing
a hierarchy of coupled auxiliary operators, an assumption valid as
long as the spectral densities can be expressed as a sum of Drude–Lorentz
contributions. This hierarchy of equations is in principle infinite
and must be truncated to a finite depth for numerical calculations.
Recent alternative formulations and implementations have increased
the numerical robustness and scalability of the method.[89,90]A simple alternative to the HEOM method is the explicit treatment
of selected nuclear degrees of freedom within the “System”
Hamiltonian , in the vibronic exciton model described
in section , whereas
the other degrees of freedom are treated within the Redfield model.[91] This “Vibronic Redfield” approach
was shown to reproduce the dynamics obtained by HEOM,[64] and was employed to model the primery charge separation
event in the reaction center of Photosystem II.[92,93]The vibronic models, the HEOM methods, and the other QME ones,
are still mostly limited to the harmonic oscillator model for the
vibronic interaction or even to a specific form for the spectral density.
In the case of HEOM, the computational complexity increases with the
number of peaks in the spectral density function,[90] which limits the use of complex spectral densities.To go beyond these limitations, it could be necessary to consider
the fully anharmonic dynamics of the nuclear degrees of freedom. Such
improvement can be achieved by dropping the quantum mechanical description
of nuclear motions, within the mixed quantum-classical approaches
such as surface hopping and mean field approximations. Within this
framework, the bath coordinates are classical variables (Rcl(t)), and their time dependence arises
from Newtonian dynamics dictated by the electronic PESs, whereas the
dynamics of the excitonic degrees of freedom is given by the time-dependent
Schrödinger equation. The extension of exciton Hamiltonian
to mean field (Ehrenfest) models has been presented some years ago
and applied to light-harvesting complexes.[94] On the contrary, only recently, the same extension has been presented
within a surface hopping dynamics. A first surface-hopping description
of dynamics and 2D spectra of an excitonic aggregate was presented
a few years ago based on a simplified resolution of the time-dependent
Schrödinger equation.[95] In such
a formulation, in fact, the quantum subsystem is propagated in time
assuming a constant Hamiltonian during the time step. This is conveniently
solved in the (local) site basis, which involves a Hamiltonian diagonalization
but does not require an explicit calculation of the nonadiabatic coupling
vectors. The same approach was successively used to simulate dynamics
and 2D spectra of LH2.[96]The first
complete implementation of excitonic Surface Hopping
was presented by Martinez and co-workers.[97,98] A multitiered parallel exciton framework was used to carry out an
“on-the-fly” nonadiabatic dynamics trajectory using
Tully’s fewest switches surface hopping (FSSH) algorithm. In
such a formulation, the exciton Hamilonian was using a dipole–dipole
approximation of the electronic coupling and the effects of the environment
were neglected. Going further along the same line, more recently Menger
et al.[99] have presented a combination of
surface hopping nonadiabatic dynamics with an exciton model that includes
the interaction between the chromophores and an external environment
through a hybrid QM/MM formulation using an electrostatic embedding
scheme. In this implementation, the excitonic couplings are modeled
using atom centered transition charges instead of point dipoles. In
both implementations a TDDFT level of QM theory was used, where in
the first implementation GPU-accelerated algorithms[100] were used.Notably, MQC approaches require an expression
for the gradients
of V with respect to
the nuclear coordinates. Although analytical expressions have been
derived for the couplings,[51] approximate
expressions eqs and 10 are easy to differentiate, especially if one neglects
the geometric dependence of the magnitude of the transition dipoles
or of the transition charges.The results of the MQC approaches
can offer important information
for multichromophoric systems that are not accessible through QME
and HEOM approaches. On the other hand, these schemes treat nuclear
degrees of freedom completely classically and as such yield correct
equilibrium population only in the high-temperature limit. Explicit
quantum mechanical treatment should be important for coupled vibrations
whose frequency is greater than the thermal energy. Nonetheless, numerical
comparisons with the HEOM method have shown that FSSH performs surprisingly
well in a range of parameters relevant for multichromophoric processes.[101−103]
Spectroscopy in Multichromophoric Systems
Optical absorption, time-resolved fluorescence, pump–probe,
and 2DES, to name a few, have been extensively applied to explore
multichromophoric systems, evidencing clear signatures of a cooperative
optical response (band splitting, redistribution of the optical intensity,
EET, and ET dynamics between the different components of the aggregate,
etc.).Circular dichroism (CD) spectra are extremely informative
for multichromophoric systems as they can be used to obtain information
about the three-dimensional disposition (distances and relative orientations)
of the interacting chromophoric units. Regarding nonlinear spectroscopy,
2DES has been widely employed, especially in the IR–VIS spectral
range. This has allowed studying light harvesting complexes and reaction
centers,[104−107] leading to a number of breakthroughs in the field. 2DES cross-peaks
give valuable information about excitonic coupling between transitions,
and they reveal energy transfer pathways when growing along increasing
waiting times (t2 > 0).[108] The EET dynamics can also be monitored by the
appearance
and disappearance of ESA signals along t2. Oscillations of the diagonal and cross-peaks along t2 are here of different origin: they can reflect either
electronic, vibrational, or vibronic coherences.One of the
first and more studied examples was 2DES on Fenna–Matthews–Olson
(FMO) protein complex from green sulfur bacteria,[104] allowing revealing of the EET cascade at 77 K. 2D spectroscopy
was also recently employed to track the EET flow through the entire photosynthetic system of green
sulfur bacteria from the chlorosome to the reaction center.[109] Besides FMO, LH complexes of purple bacteria
were also extensively studied with 2D techniques in various spectral
regions.[70] Here the presence of carotenoids,
with their ultrashort state lifetimes and strong coupling to intramolecular
vibrational modes, enriches the photo physics of the system, producing
a number of overlapping spectroscopic features which make their interpretation
highly nontrivial.[110]When they were
first discovered, long living oscillations in 2D
spectroscopy of the FMO complex were interpreted as a signature of
quantum coherence between donor and acceptor electronic states,[105] leading researchers to speculate about robust
wave-like transport through quantum coherence, but doubts concerning
this interpretation were later raised. This has produced a wealth
of studies aimed at identifying the origin of these oscillations,[111−114] boosting the development of accurate theoretical models while remaining
the subject of intense debate.[6]From
a computational perspective, the main ingredients of spectroscopy
simulations within the exciton model are readily obtained from the
coefficients of eq .
For example, the absorption intensity of an excitonic state K depends on the excitonic transition dipole , where μ are the transition dipoles of the chromophores
and
the coefficients c provide the redistribution
of the chromophore dipole strength. When moving to the intensity of
CD signals, instead, the exciton rotatory strength has to be introduced,
namely , where denotes the
imaginary part, and the and are the operators of electric and magnetic
moment vectors, respectively. As for the exciton electric transition
dipoles, the magnetic ones also can be obtained using the site properties
(the intrinsic magnetic moments, mint) and the exciton
coefficients. Now, however, an additional term depending on the position R of the chromophore has to be
considered to account for the gauge invariance, namelyIn most cases, however,
the intrinsic magnetic moments of the chromophores
are negligible, and the following approximate Rosenfeld equation,
involving only electric transition dipoles, can be introduced:where R is the vector distance between the centers
of chromophores i and j.In
the spirit of the perturbative treatment of vibronic coupling,
the line shape functions g(t) of the exciton states are obtained from
the excitonic spectral densities of eq . The multichromophoric spectrum is thus computed as
a sum over all exciton states (SOS), each with its energy, position,
and line shape.[68] The same treatment can
be extended to nonlinear spectroscopies.[46] To describe ESA signals in nonlinear spectroscopies, one has to
consider higher-lying states of the multichromophoric system. Usually,
these are easily constructed on the basis of doubly excited states
|ij⟩ by diagonalization of a double-exciton
Hamiltonian analogous to that of eq .[46,115] Higher-lying excited states
of the chromophores themselves, which may fall in the same energy
window contributing to the overall ESA signal,[110] can also be added, providing their energy location and
dipole moments are accurately estimated by QC computations.The SOS approach[45,46] treats the exciton states as
independent: the response functions (eqs and 4) are expressed in terms
of exciton states, and the population transfer between the states
described by a rate equation such as the Redfield equation. When the
excited-state dynamics is more complex, the SOS approach is not correct
anymore. Indeed, the linear and nonlinear responses of the system
depend on the details of the excited-state dynamics. Nonlinear response
functions can be calculated with the HEOM method by explicitly considering
the successive application of dipoles operators on the reduced density
matrix,[115] as well as with other nonperturbative
methods, such as the semiclassical path integral description of the
density matrix dynamics.[116] In the case
of mixed quantum-classical dynamics, recipes have been developed for
calculating nonlinear response in the Ehrenfest[94] and Surface Hopping[95,117] approaches.
Can the Exciton Model Always Be the Answer?
In the
previous section, we have presented and discussed the possible
theoretical approaches and the related computational strategies that
are most commonly applied to describe (large) multichromophoric systems.
The main assumption at the basis of such methods is that the entire
system can be mapped into a simplified Hamiltonian, built from the
independent but interacting chromophores. This is indeed a sensible
approximation for most of the multichromophoric biosystems; in particular,
it has shown to be a very effective approach for describing many LH
complexes.[10] These, in fact, are generally
rather “rigid” systems, with spatially separated chromophores,
whose first excitation is usually well separated from higher-lying
states. The approximation of harmonic PESs and linear vibronic coupling,
fundamental for the application of most QME techniques, has been verified
for chromophores in LH complexes.[35,119,120] Finally, the chromophores in LH complexes generally
have long intrinsic lifetimes,[121] thus,
the internal dynamics of the excited chromophores can be safely neglected.
Of course, there are some exceptions to this general picture of LH
systems, especially those containing carotenoids. The latter in fact
present a complex ultrafast dynamics with a rapid decay of their bright
S2 state.[122,123] Nonetheless, in most LH complexes,
the electronic excitations on carotenoids are generally well localized
due to the large energy gap with the neighboring chromophores, which
has allowed a simplified treatment of photoinduced dynamics for these
systems.[67,110] For example, the peridinin–chlorophyll
protein, which contains eight polar carotenoids (peridinins) and one
chlorophyll per monomer, has been investigated with modified Redfield
theory, showing that the exciton model is a powerful technique even
for multichromophoric systems containing carotenoids.[124]However, there is another class of multichromophoric
biosystems
that represents a real challenge for these methods. This important
exception is represented by nucleic acids: here, orbital overlap between
neighboring chromophore units is not negligible; moreover, ground
and excited states display qualitatively different, possibly crossing,
topographies, breaking most of the previously introduced assumptions
and activating both photophysical and photochemical processes. A face
to face comparison between LH-like and DNA-like multichromophoric
systems is shown in Figure .
Figure 5
Different “faces” of the modeling when applied to
LH-like and DNA-like multichromophoric systems. On the right, a perfect
face (“Mona Lisa” by L. da Vinci, adapted with permission
from ref (118). Copyright
2015 American Chemical Society), which represents the modeling of
LH complexes, with approximations which can be controlled and tuned.
On the left, a peculiar face (cubist-style portrait of Pablo Picasso,
image provided by shutterstock.com; image ID 533658418): one identifies various components (eyes, nose,
mouth, etc.), but the face as a whole is not easy to read. This represents
the present challenges in the modeling of DNA-like multichromophoric
systems.
Different “faces” of the modeling when applied to
LH-like and DNA-like multichromophoric systems. On the right, a perfect
face (“Mona Lisa” by L. da Vinci, adapted with permission
from ref (118). Copyright
2015 American Chemical Society), which represents the modeling of
LH complexes, with approximations which can be controlled and tuned.
On the left, a peculiar face (cubist-style portrait of Pablo Picasso,
image provided by shutterstock.com; image ID 533658418): one identifies various components (eyes, nose,
mouth, etc.), but the face as a whole is not easy to read. This represents
the present challenges in the modeling of DNA-like multichromophoric
systems.In DNA/RNA systems, the “natural”
units, i.e., the
nucleobases, already present complex excited-state PESs with multiple
crossings between states,[125] which contribute
to rich photoinduced dynamics for the isolated chromophores.[126] The energy of UV light, absorbed by DNA due
to strongly allowed ππ* transitions, is deposited into
the ground state via ultrafast decay pathways, which involve multiple
crossings with other singlet and triplet states.[125,127] Exactly because of these unique characteristics, the potential damage
(carcinogenic mutations, cell lethality, etc.) induced by UV light
absorption is significantly lowered in nucleic acids by highly efficient
nonradiative decay to the ground state. On the other hand, these same
characteristics prevent a simple application of the techniques described
above to model photoinduced dynamics in polynucleotides.Isolated
nucleobases have been extensively investigated by quantum
chemical studies, both in gas phase or solution and in DNA-like environments.[125] Both mapping of the PES landscapes of the photochemically
relevant states (by critical points, real crossings, and MEPs optimizations)[127−129] and running nonadiabatic MQC dynamics[130−133] or QD[134,135] have been largely used in this context.
A full arsenal of QM methods has been also employed, spanning from
semiempirical methods[136] to single reference
(TDDFT, ADC(2)) and multiconfigurational/multireference–perturbative
approaches (CASSCF/CASPT2).Such a detailed investigation, however,
has been shown to be insufficient,
as the correct picture of DNA cannot be fully recovered from the properties
of the isolated nucleobases. When one moves from single nucleobases
to oligo- and polynucleotides, in fact, new and slower (by several
orders of magnitude) decay processes appear.[137−140] On the one hand, the already mentioned deactivation pathways from
the bright ππ* states are still operative although slightly
slowered by the structural constraints of the rigid architecture embedding
the nucleobases.[141,142] On the other hand, a wealth
of new dynamics arises, originating from “collective”
excited states, including Frenkel excitons and CT states, whose existence
have been proven both experimentally[138,143,144] and theoretically.[145−147]To describe this
collective behavior, the QM description has been
extended to several nucleobases but, as such, the level of the QM
approaches has been necessarily lowered. Semiempirical methods such
as ZINDO have been used[148] but TDDFT has
been mainly applied, including QM regions as large as eight stacked
adenines,[146] providing information about
the extension of the excitation (mainly over two nucleobases) and
showing that the spectral intensity is affected by Frenkel excitons
and states with partial CT character in equal amounts. More accurate,
but expensive, multireference perturbative approaches have been also
employed although mostly limited to QM dimers.[142,147,149,150]DNA has been also modeled through exciton approaches, showing
the
sensitivity of the exciton delocalization upon DNA conformations and
nucleobases composition.[151−157] Different partitions of DNA structures into sites have also been
assessed.[158] Moreover, the extension of
the exciton Hamiltonian to CT states, in combination with explicit
vibronic dynamics and Redfield theory, has shown that CT states are
populated from bright states within a few tens of femtoseconds.[159]In nucleic acids, however, the application
of these exciton models
has to be limited to static descriptions or to very short time windows.
In fact, at longer time scales, the nuclei move away from the Franck–Condon
region and explore both anharmonic regions and crossings with other
states. The flexibility of the DNA/RNA scaffold translates into a
large variability of the long-range structure of the nucleobases assembly,
opening and/or quenching different relaxation paths: indeed, understanding
the (static and dynamic) structural factors that control the dissipation
of the excess electronic energy in DNA, without producing deleterious
reactions, is one of the most fascinating challenges in the field.
Photochemical reactions may also take place, implying an additional
challenge to the theoretical description of these systems, which must
go beyond the one employed in LH complexes; for instance, a proton
transfer pathway between base pairs was shown to be key in the relaxation
of the excited duplex.[160] Dimerization
reactions also occur for specific configurations, showing that the
evolution of delocalized Frenkel exciton states may branch into different
intra- and interbase decay paths, including CT states.[150,161]All these specificities clearly make nucleic acids an extremely
challenging multichromophoric system where exciton approaches show
all their intrinsic limitations.
Challenges
and Future Directions
The trivial, “brute-force”
approach, which enlarges
the size of the QM region so as to consistently describe all the photophysically/chemically
relevant processes, is still an unfeasible route for the modeling
of large multichromophoric systems: therefore, alternative and more
approximate methods have been proposed. Here we have presented and
discussed the state of the art of these methods, but we have also
shown their intrinsic limitations which still prevent a complete and
accurate description of the various photoinduced processes characterizing
the different biologically relevant systems. As such, new and alternative
strategies are required.Among them, a promising one is to merge
the brute-force QM strategy
with the excitonic approach, using larger, still feasible, QM building
blocks for the exciton Hamiltonian. As a result, the enormous difficulty
of the single full QM treatment is split within several easier QM
calculations which can be performed independently and therefore are
perfectly suitable for modern multicore architectures. Moreover, by
cleverly enlarging the QM units, possible effects of CT states would
be automatically included without the need of introducing a posteriori
corrections. Finally, by combining this approach with some of the
already proposed extensions which remove harmonic PESs constraints
and/or integrate the exciton Hamiltonian to TSH nonadiabatic dynamics,
a very powerful strategy will be achieved.To turn this strategy
into a feasible computational approach, however,
important problems have to be faced. On the one hand, the dimensions
of the extended Hamiltonian will grow up significantly, and algorithms
will likely need a reformulation to allow exploiting GPU parallelization;
on the other hand, the calculation of the forces for the dynamics
will call for new smart and fast methodologies such as machine learning
methods.[162] Finally, environment models
will also need to be improved, both in accuracy and efficiency when
applied to problems involving multiple excited states and their nonadiabatic
dynamics.On top of all that, a fundamental problem remains
to be faced,
namely the correct inclusion of fluctuations. Indeed, in multichromophoric
systems, the coupled fluctuations in intra- and intermolecular motions
play a much more important role than for a single molecule: in addition
to vibronic coupling, fluctuations in the van der Waals and the hydrogen
bonding interactions between each chromophore and the components of
the bio matrix, in the electrostatic fields and local polarization
response, and large scale structural deformations are here extremely
important, as they can significantly affect both the nature of the
excitons (tuning local excitations, interchromophoric interactions,
etc.) and their dynamics.Taking into account all these effects
means to cover many time
scales and necessarily requires the use of classical dynamics simulations,
possibly in conjunction with enhanced sampling techniques.[163] In this context, a major role will be played
by the selected MM force field: if this should not constitute a critical
issue for the description of the biomatrix/solvent motions, as FF
are optimized exactly for this purpose, the same accuracy is not expected
to be retained for the embedded chromophores, where structures coming
from classical simulations are likely to introduce artifacts and/or
inaccuracies in the evaluation of electronic properties. Even if the
highly conjugated nature of the most common chromophores present in
multichromophoric biosystems represents a real challenge for MM formulations,[164] recently proposed examples of new FFs optimized
for the specificities of each single chromophore have been shown to
give a much better description with respect to more traditional FFs.[165−167] On the same line, an effective integration of classical MD based
on such optimized FFs and Born–Oppenheimer QM/MM dynamics can
represent a valid strategy to obtain accuracy in both the sampling
of the complex conformational space of the biosystem and the description
of intramolecular motions of the embedded chromophores.[168]In conclusion, to achieve a complete
and accurate description of
the complex photoinduced activity in multichromophoric biosystems,
a long path has still to be walked. Nonetheless, the smart integration
of classical and quantum chemical (static and dynamic) approaches
combined with the development in high performing multicore architecture,
GPU accelerated algorithms, and machine learning techniques draws
an optimistic horizon.
Authors: Thomas Schultz; Elena Samoylova; Wolfgang Radloff; Ingolf V Hertel; Andrzej L Sobolewski; Wolfgang Domcke Journal: Science Date: 2004-12-03 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Tobias Brixner; Jens Stenger; Harsha M Vaswani; Minhaeng Cho; Robert E Blankenship; Graham R Fleming Journal: Nature Date: 2005-03-31 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Barbara Patrizi; Concetta Cozza; Adriana Pietropaolo; Paolo Foggi; Mario Siciliani de Cumis Journal: Molecules Date: 2020-01-20 Impact factor: 4.411