Kevin M Felter1, Ferdinand C Grozema1. 1. Optoelectronic Materials Section, Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Applied Sciences , Delft University of Technology , Van der Maasweg 9 , 2629 HS Delft , The Netherlands.
Abstract
Singlet fission (SF) involves the conversion of one excited singlet state into two lower excited triplet states and has received considerable renewed attention over the past decade. This Perspective highlights recent developments and emerging concepts of SF in solid-state crystalline materials. Recent experiments showed the crucial role of vibrational modes in speeding up SF, and theoretical modeling has started to define an optimal energetic landscape and intermolecular orientation of chromophores for highly efficient singlet fission. A critical analysis of these developments leads to directions for future research to eventually find singlet fission chromophores with excellent optoelectronic properties.
Singlet fission (SF) involves the conversion of one excited singlet state into two lower excited triplet states and has received considerable renewed attention over the past decade. This Perspective highlights recent developments and emerging concepts of SF in solid-state crystalline materials. Recent experiments showed the crucial role of vibrational modes in speeding up SF, and theoretical modeling has started to define an optimal energetic landscape and intermolecular orientation of chromophores for highly efficient singlet fission. A critical analysis of these developments leads to directions for future research to eventually find singlet fission chromophores with excellent optoelectronic properties.
Singlet exciton
fission (SF)
is a photophysical process by which a singlet excited state is converted
into two triplet excited states, each with about half of the energy
of the initial singlet. SF was initially described in the 1960s and
1970s as an explanation for the observed delayed fluorescence in acene
crystals.[1,2] In the early 2000s the interest in singlet
fission was renewed as it was realized that it could be exploited
as a route to increase the photon-to-electricity efficiency of organic
photovoltaic devices (OPV). Incorporation of singlet fission into
OPV devices can boost the maximum attainable photon-to-electricity
efficiency from 33 to 47% by minimizing the thermal relaxation losses
included in the Shockley–Queisser limit.[3] Such increases will be hard to reach in practice, but simulations
have indicated that combining a SF layer with a state-of-the-art silicon
solar cell can increase the efficiency by up to 4.2% absolute.[4]In order to capitalize on the promise of
singlet fission for improving
the efficiency of organic solar cells, both the yield of SF itself
and the separation of the generated triplets into charge carriers
are essential requirements. Currently, efficient extraction of charges
after singlet fission has been demonstrated in only a few systems,
with low efficiency or limited to very specific excitation wavelengths.[5−7] Most work on such devices and other more fundamental SF research
is done on molecules that belong to the acene family. However, these
acenes do not possess all the characteristics that are optimal when
considering SF-based OPV devices.[8] A specific
problem related to acenes is that they are particularly prone to photodegradation.[9] Therefore, fundamental knowledge on the mechanism
and dynamics of SF in solid-state systems is essential in establishing
guidelines for the design of chromophores that do possess optimal
SF characteristics. These characteristics include being minimally
exoergic, ultrafast, and highly efficient but displaying good charge
transport properties.[10] Important electronic
and structural conditions that play a role in attaining optimal SF
characteristics include (1) fulfilment of adiabatic energy conditions E(T2) – E(S0) > E(S1) and E(S1) – E(S0) ≥ 2[E(T1) – E(S0)], (2) a suitable molecular packing that optimizes the intermolecular
electronic coupling for SF but at the same time minimizes competitive
singlet deactivation pathways, and (3) efficient separation of triplet
excited states into free charges.These electronic and
structural conditions for SF have been explored
in a multitude of theoretical studies. First, electronic structure
calculations by time-dependent density functional theory or configuration
interaction-based methods from which accurate S1, S2, T1, and T2 energies are obtained allowed
the identification of SF candidates based on the adiabatic energy
conditions.[11,12] Second, calculations of the electronic
coupling for singlet fission have been mostly calculated in dimer
systems, revealing that the molecular packing strongly affects the
fission rate and yield. In order to study the dynamics of fission
and explore the importance of different pathways, density matrix propagation
methods have been used. The latter have also emphasized the role of
vibronic coupling in the singlet fission process.[13] These theoretical studies on SF in dimers have resulted
in many new insights; however, the subsequent processes, such as the
dissociation of the correlated triplet pair into free triplets, the
diffusion of triplets, and their separation into free charges, have
remained largely unexplored. The latter processes are of pivotal importance
when SF compounds are to be applied in the solid state in actual devices.Crystalline organic materials offer an ideal platform for experimental
studies on SF dynamics as the intermolecular packing in the solid
can be controlled by altering the chemical structure of the individual
molecules. Moreover, they naturally consist of extended arrays of
molecules where the coherent triplet pair state can separate into
uncoupled triplets.[14] Furthermore, the
solid-state structure allows the study of the relation between the
nature of the excited state and exciton transport and charge separation.[15] It should be noted that efficient SF has also
been reported for polycrystalline and amorphous materials with high
efficiency, showing that sufficiently strong electronic interactions
exist in such systems.[16,17] The drawback of such systems
is that they are less well-defined, and hence, it is more difficult
to derive detailed structure–property relations.In this
Perspective we discuss some of the fundamental issues in
the field of singlet fission and theoretical and experimental approaches
that may answer the key questions about the singlet fission mechanisms
and dynamics, in particular for crystalline materials. We discuss
observations that suggest the existence of a mixed charge transfer
(CT) intermediate or quintet state in the singlet fission mechanism,[18] assess the role of phonon–electron coupling
rate in the fission dynamics,[19] and investigate
how decoherence studies may unravel triplet pair state dissociation
and how the exciton diffusion is influenced by this. Finally, some
direction is given to address the current challenges in the field
of SF.A first-order picture of the states involved in transforming
a
singlet into a combination of two triplets is given in Figure where the SF process starts
from the S1 state. This S1 excited state is,
in first approximation, considered to be localized on a single molecule
but can also be a delocalized exciton state. After the initial excitation,
the multiexciton triplet state or correlated triplet pair state 1(TT) can be formed via the direct pathway (blue arrow). Alternatively,
SF may proceed through virtual intermediate states that have CT character,
provided that these states are not too high in energy (green and orange
arrow).[8] These different energy states
of the system involving two molecules A and B can be expressed in
a “basis” of diabatic states in the singlet ground state
S0AS0B, localized excited
singlets S1AS0B and S0AS1B, a lowest-energy triplet
pair or correlated triplet pair 1(T1AT1B), and the charge transfer states 1(C+AA–B) and 1(A–AC+B). In this description, C+ represents the
ground state of a radical cation while A– represents
the ground state of the respective radical anion. In the following
discussion we will omit the superscripts A and B that denote the SF
dimer components for clarity. Using these diabatic basis states we
can write the rate of the singlet fission process in terms of the
electronic Hamiltonian operator Hel.
Figure 1
Schematic representation
of the direct (blue lines) and indirect,
CT-state-mediated (green and orange) singlet fission mechanism. The
matrix elements are shown in bra-ket notation that represents the
electronic coupling involved in the mechanism steps.
Schematic representation
of the direct (blue lines) and indirect,
CT-state-mediated (green and orange) singlet fission mechanism. The
matrix elements are shown in bra-ket notation that represents the
electronic coupling involved in the mechanism steps.The simplest quantum mechanical description of the SF rate, w(SF), via the direct pathway is governed by the electronic
coupling between S1S0 and 1(TT),
⟨1TT|Hel|S1S0⟩,
and in a first-order perturbation theory approximation is given bywhere ρ[E] is the Franck–Condon
weighed density of states at E = E(S0S1) = E1(TT).
The matrix element for this direct pathway, ⟨1TT|Hel|S1S0⟩, is usually very small,
even though energetically this is the most favorable process, and
the expression for w(SF) improves by incorporating
terms from additional electronic states. Incorporating pathways due
to additional electronic states such as charge transfer states can
significantly increase the SF rate from that of the simple direct
pathway in eq , depending
on the energy of these states. Important virtual states that play
a role are low-energy CT states and result in additional matrix terms
⟨1CA|Hel|S1S0⟩,
⟨1AC|Hel|S1S0⟩,
and ⟨1TT|Hel|1AC⟩,
⟨1TT|Hel|1CA⟩ from
interaction with the S0S1 and TT states. A simplified
Hamiltonian matrix for a dimer system in terms of the singlet CT and
triplet pair states is given in eq , with the excited-state energies on the diagonal and
the electronic coupling between the different states on the off-diagonals.
The blue elements are involved in the direct pathway, while the green
and orange matrix elements are involved in the virtual intermediate
pathway.The matrix elements that make up the Hamiltonian
in eq are strongly
dependent on the mutual orientation and distance of neighboring molecules,
which is intricately linked to the nodal structure of the frontier
molecular orbitals. A typical example orbital schematic is shown in Figure for the charge transfer
coupling matrix element, tHL, which involves
coupling between the HOMO (h) and LUMO (l) orbitals on molecules A
and B. In this case, in a perfect face-to-face stacking arrangement
the coupling is exactly zero, while a slip-stacked geometry leads
to a maximum in the coupling. A similar picture exists for the electronic
coupling of the direct process, t2e; however,
the maximum coupling will occur at a different displacement.
Figure 2
Schematic representation
of frontier molecular orbitals (HOMO and
LUMO) and their overlaps for a perfect stacking and slipped stack
configuration of two PDI molecules. The slipping directions along
the long axis (x) and short axis (y) are indicated as used in Figure .
Schematic representation
of frontier molecular orbitals (HOMO and
LUMO) and their overlaps for a perfect stacking and slipped stack
configuration of two PDI molecules. The slipping directions along
the long axis (x) and short axis (y) are indicated as used in Figure .
Figure 3
Singlet fission rates as obtained via the direct and CT-mediated
pathways (a) and the overall SF rate as a function of translation
along the short (y) and long axis as indicated in Figure (b). (c) Comparison of the
calculated and experimental SF rates.
The strong connection
between the stacking geometry in the crystal
and magnitude and sign of the coupling matrix elements directly points
to ways to optimize the initial step in singlet fission. If the mutual orientation, or the degree of “slipping”
in a slip-stacked structure can be controlled, it is possible to systematically
study the relation between structure and SF efficiency. An example
of a class of materials where this is possible are perylene diimides,
where the crystal structure can be tuned to a large extent by varying
the substituents on the imid position.[20] Using the geometry-dependent electronic coupling matrix elements,
we have shown recently that strong differences are to be expected
for different PDI derivatives.[21] Using
the Hamiltonian matrix in eq in a Redfield density matrix propagation study, insight was
obtained in the dynamics of the initial fission process for different
geometries.[13,21] A map of the resulting rates
for different geometries, shown in Figure a, shows a strong
dependence of the SF rate on geometry. In addition, in such a model-Hamiltonian
study it is possible to look at the contributions of the individual
pathways, i.e., direct versus CT-mediated. In this particular example
the geometry dependence of these two pathways is markedly different
as shown in Figure a, but it is also clear that the overall process is dominated by
the CT-mediated contribution.[13,21] Experimentally, the
strong effect of the molecular packing on SF dynamics was confirmed
by femtosecond transient absorption experiments,[22−24] although the
described rates are of a different order of magnitude, as shown in Figure c. The latter can
be due to assumptions made on the energy of the different states involved.
A similar correlation between structure and SF dynamic has been described
for the acene family where slip stacking is also shown to benefit
SF in tetracene and pentacene, making it faster and more efficient
when compared to less ordered derivative structures.[22,25−27]Singlet fission rates as obtained via the direct and CT-mediated
pathways (a) and the overall SF rate as a function of translation
along the short (y) and long axis as indicated in Figure (b). (c) Comparison of the
calculated and experimental SF rates.All examples mentioned here primarily relate to the initial fission
process in a dimer picture and in a simplified basis with very few
states involved. In reality, the relevant states are not so rigorously
disconnected and mixed states exist. This is for instance evident
from configuration interaction calculations where it is shown that
the coherent triplet pair state often has a complex composition, including
also CT determinants and mixing of singlet and quintet character.[28−30] This has also been shown experimentally.[31]In the large majority of theoretical studies, the most focus
is
on the initial triplet pair state in a dimer. However, if the energy
of the two triplets is to be harvested efficiently, the subsequent
process where this pair state is split up into two individual triplets
that can freely diffuse is essential. This requires extended systems
with a detailed description of decoherence, which is a challenge for
theoretical work in this field.Apart from the electronic coupling
there is substantial evidence
from experiments and theory that the interaction of the exciton with
inter- and intramolecular vibrational modes significantly affects
singlet fission.[32] This can be due to energy
provided to bring the singlet and triplet state in resonance or due
to fluctuations in the electronic coupling matrix elements.[33] This electron–phonon (vibronic) coupling
can be referred to as Peierls and Holstein for defining exciton coupling
with intermolecular and intramolecular vibrational modes, respectively.Following the Redfield density matrix study on SF dynamics in PDI
molecules, the inclusion of Peierls vibrational coupling in the simulation
was shown to result in accelerated triplet pair state formation from
a picosecond to subpicosecond time scale.[13] The rate acceleration was shown to be unaffected by the CT-state
level energy from which the authors deduced that the CT-state acts
as a virtual intermediate in a superexchange singlet fission mechanism.
Similar findings were reported for acenes, where Holstein vibronic
coupling increased the singlet and triplet pair state coupling in
tetracene.[34] Secondly, in pentacene the
incorporation of coherent vibrational mixing was found to accelerate
SF.[35,36]These vibronic effects cannot be measured
directly in linear transient
absorption measurements, but such techniques do allow the detection
of coherent phonons from the presence of strong oscillations at early
times (1 ps) in photoinduced absorption or emission measurements.[18,37−40] The frequency of such oscillations can be compared to FT Raman spectra
of the same material to confirm that these coherent phonon signatures
are indeed related to specific vibrational modes that influence different
excited-state processes. Relating these vibronic coupling effects
to different excitonic states can be achieved with complex two-dimensional
spectroscopic techniques such as the four-wave mixing. Two-dimensional
spectroscopy allows monitoring both the electronic and electron–phonon
coupling between electronic states and the excitation pathway by which
they are created.[41] Normally the triplet
pair state cannot be directly observed because of its low oscillator
strength and needs to be obtained from a SF global or target analysis
model,[31,42,43] although very
recently ultrafast mid-IR spectroscopy did allow the direct observation
of triplet pair states.[44,45]One example of
a four-wave mixing technique that is used for studying
singlet fission is two-dimensional electronic photon-echo spectroscopy
(2DES).[18,46] A 2DES study on thin films of pentacene
and derivatives revealed the presence of an otherwise dark triplet
pair state. This observation was possible because of the increased
sensitivity of the 2DES technique, in comparison to regular pump–probe
absorption spectroscopy.[18] Furthermore,
quantum beating signatures were observed in the kinetic traces of
singlet and triplet pair states that corresponded to vibronic modes
observed in Raman spectra. These vibronic modes were found to be present
in the spectral region of both the singlet exciton and the triplet
pair state, indicating their influence in mixing the two states.The relevance of vibrational mode coupling and CT-state intermediate
mixing in accelerating intermolecular singlet fission is generally
accepted.[32] However, the extent to which
both factors are involved depends on the singlet fission mechanism
that one follows. A schematic representation for the singlet fission
process is shown in Figure a where the singlet excited state S1 can form an
electronically coupled (electronically coherent) triplet pair state
or an electronically decoupled (electronically decoherent) triplet
pair state.[47] The formation of the electronically
coherent triplet pair state can be described by a coherent quantum
mechanism as described above or by an incoherent mechanism that allows
a classical kinetic treatment. In the incoherent mechanism, a photoexcited
singlet state (1) evolves into a triplet pair state 1(TT)
as the electronic coupling between S1 and 1(TT)
is weaker than their coupling to the phonon bath and is therefore
a thermally assisted process. On the other hand, in the coherent mechanism
the photoexcitation creates an excited state that is a superposition
of singlet, CT, and 1(TT). Recent experiments[37−39] show that both mechanisms occur concurrently during the singlet
fission process at different time scales. The observation of such
a dual mechanism can be expected as photoexcitation generates a superposition
of a singlet excited state, triplet pair states, and CT intermediate
states. Such superposition states, created by coherent excitations,
can explain ultrafast femtosecond time scale SF rates. The extent
to which these different species are formed within the superposition
depends on the excited-state energetics which in turn is dictated
by the singlet fission chromophore and its molecular packing.[32] Furthermore, quantum calculations show that
such coherent excitations are possible only when a conical intersection
exists between a singlet and triplet pair state[38] as described earlier.[40] The
slower SF component, on the order of hundreds of femtoseconds, may
then come from the incoherent mechanism for forming 1(TT).
The loss in electronic coherence of 1TT to form two spin
entangled but electronically decoupled triplets 1(T··T)
can occur by coupling to the phonon bath, i.e., vibronic coupling
and by physical separation occurring via triplet energy transfer that
is driven by enthalpic and entropic driving forces. Finally, the loss
in spin coherence or spin coupling between triplets can occur slowly
on a nanosecond to microsecond time scale.
Figure 4
(a) Schematic energy
diagram illustrating the different electronic
processes and states involved in SF: Photoexcitation from the ground
state (1) creates a superposition state of S1, CT, and 1(TT)0 involving interstate conversion between S1 and 1(TT)0 (2). Subsequently, 1(TT)0 loses electronic coupling during physical
triplet state separation and phonon bath interaction and forms 1(T··T) (3). The final step is the spin decoherence
resulting in the formation of free triplets (4). (b) Schematic representation
of triplet exciton formation from singlet fission. The photoexcited
superposition state is composed of S1S0, CT,
and 1TT states whose formation rate depends on the state
mixing. The 1(TT) state can lose coherence, both electronically
and relating to spin, to form individual separate triplet excitons
that can diffuse.
(a) Schematic energy
diagram illustrating the different electronic
processes and states involved in SF: Photoexcitation from the ground
state (1) creates a superposition state of S1, CT, and 1(TT)0 involving interstate conversion between S1 and 1(TT)0 (2). Subsequently, 1(TT)0 loses electronic coupling during physical
triplet state separation and phonon bath interaction and forms 1(T··T) (3). The final step is the spin decoherence
resulting in the formation of free triplets (4). (b) Schematic representation
of triplet exciton formation from singlet fission. The photoexcited
superposition state is composed of S1S0, CT,
and 1TT states whose formation rate depends on the state
mixing. The 1(TT) state can lose coherence, both electronically
and relating to spin, to form individual separate triplet excitons
that can diffuse.As mentioned above, one
requirement for application of SF chromophores
in photovoltaics is to have a sufficiently high triplet diffusion
coefficient. In this context one can perceive triplet diffusion as
the diffusion of individual triplet states that may interconvert to
singlet states via the triplet–triplet annihilation pathway
as represented in Figure b.[48] Alternatively, triplet diffusion
can be understood as correlated triplet pair diffusion where the triplets
have mixed singlet–triplet character.[15,49]A variety of experimental techniques allow the study of triplet
diffusion in solid-state materials such as transient absorption spectroscopy,
photoluminescence, and microwave conductivity.[50] These studies are necessary as molecular packing and macroscale
crystalline domain size are important factors that determine diffusion
properties and cannot (easily) be modeled theoretically or studied
in solution.[51] However, these techniques
are either limited to measuring the ensemble sample morphology (as
is the case in transient absorption) or are limited by the spectral
features necessary to determine specific exciton species. A recently
developed optical measurement technique that tackles both issues is
transient absorption microscopy. This measurement technique allows
ultrafast (200 fs time resolution) and spatial optical probing of
excitons on a micro- and macroscale with a 50 nm spatial resolution.[15] As such, the investigators were able to study
triplet exciton diffusion in a variety of singlet fission chromophores
and found that singlet-mediated triplet transport, i.e., an exciton
with mixed singlet–triplet character, increases the triplet
diffusion coefficient by more than an order of magnitude. In a follow-up
study the same group found a correlation between the SF endothermicity
and the triplet diffusion length of several acene molecules that was
attributed to an increasing singlet-mediated SF pathway.[49] What remains unknown from this study is which
triplet pair state is responsible for the singlet-mediated diffusion.
The identification of specific triplet pair states formed during singlet
fission was performed recently in photoluminescence measurements at
high magnetic field.[52] The investigators
use the magnetic field to tune the otherwise dark triplet pair state
into resonance with the optically bright singlet state thereby decreasing
the photoluminescence. As a result, dips in the photoluminescence
emerge at specific magnetic field strengths that correspond to specific
triplet pair exchange-coupling strengths. The investigators argue
that this resonance excitation technique may supplement transient
microscopy absorption measurement in identifying triplet pair state
specific diffusion.This overview demonstrates singlet fission research has significantly
evolved over the past decade. The research started from basic characterizations
of yield and kinetics of SF by time-resolved fluorescence and ultrafast
transient absorption spectroscopy. Combined with theoretical studies,
this has given a considerable amount of insight into the efficiency
of the initial step in SF, i.e., transforming a singlet state into
a coherent combination of two triplets. This has also given some insight
into the mechanism by which this occurs, although in most cases this
relies on comparisons of experiments and theory and no general picture
including vibronic effects is currently available. Studies on how
the coherent triplet pair dissociates into separately diffusing triplets
have only recently appeared for some systems; however, these processes
are instrumental in actual applications, and therefore, a detailed
understanding is of prime importance. In all these processes, including
triplet diffusion and charge injection, the relevant electronic coupling
matrix elements play a key role. This is why more insight into the
effect of solid-state morphology and polycrystallinity in particular
is important and why SF chromophores of which the crystal packing
can be tuned are of particular interest. Systematic variation of the
electronic coupling, as is possible for instance in perylene diimides,
can be used to unravel the effect of the different coupling values
in the different processes. In addition, systematic variations of
the energetics of the different states involved can give insight into
the nature of the triplet-pair states involved (singlet, triplet,
and quintet). The latter is possible by performing optical spectroscopy
in high magnetic fields, and such experiments should prove very valuable
in gaining more insight in the SF dynamics and subsequent processes.
In addition, the initial formation of a coherent triplet pair and
its subsequent decoherence into individual triplet is an important
aspect, which can be explicitly studied by two-dimensional coherent
spectroscopy. In all these experiments, materials where the crystal
structure can be systematically tuned are appropriate, especially
in relation with theory because high-level quantum chemical calculations
invariably require information on the structure. From the theory side
it is important to continue to move beyond the initial step of forming
a triplet pair in a dimer, but to study the dynamics in larger aggregates
with an explicit description of decoherence and triplet diffusion.
The application of methods such as high magnetic field measurements
and 2D spectroscopy on samples with well-defined interchromophore
geometry will ultimately lead to a more detailed general understanding
and design rules for SF chromophores that go beyond simple energy
arguments.
Authors: Artem A Bakulin; Sarah E Morgan; Tom B Kehoe; Mark W B Wilson; Alex W Chin; Donatas Zigmantas; Dassia Egorova; Akshay Rao Journal: Nat Chem Date: 2015-10-26 Impact factor: 24.427
Authors: Shane R Yost; Jiye Lee; Mark W B Wilson; Tony Wu; David P McMahon; Rebecca R Parkhurst; Nicholas J Thompson; Daniel N Congreve; Akshay Rao; Kerr Johnson; Matthew Y Sfeir; Moungi G Bawendi; Timothy M Swager; Richard H Friend; Marc A Baldo; Troy Van Voorhis Journal: Nat Chem Date: 2014-05-04 Impact factor: 24.427
Authors: Ryan D Pensack; Evgeny E Ostroumov; Andrew J Tilley; Samuel Mazza; Christopher Grieco; Karl J Thorley; John B Asbury; Dwight S Seferos; John E Anthony; Gregory D Scholes Journal: J Phys Chem Lett Date: 2016-06-13 Impact factor: 6.475
Authors: Aaron K Le; Jon A Bender; Dylan H Arias; Daniel E Cotton; Justin C Johnson; Sean T Roberts Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2018-01-04 Impact factor: 15.419