Roberta Pascazio1,2, Francesco Zaccaria1, Bas van Beek3, Ivan Infante1,4,5. 1. Department of Nanochemistry, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, Via Morego 30, 16163 Genova, Italy. 2. Dipartimento di Chimica e Chimica Industriale, Università degli Studi di Genova, Via Dodecaneso 31, 16146 Genova, Italy. 3. Department of Theoretical Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, de Boelelaan 1083, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 4. BCMaterials, Basque Center for Materials, Applications, and Nanostructures, UPV/EHU Science Park, Leioa 48940, Spain. 5. Ikerbasque, Basque Foundation for Science, Bilbao 48009, Spain.
Abstract
Understanding the chemico-physical properties of colloidal semiconductor nanocrystals (NCs) requires exploration of the dynamic processes occurring at the NC surfaces, in particular at the ligand-NC interface. Classical molecular dynamics (MD) simulations under realistic conditions are a powerful tool to acquire this knowledge because they have good accuracy and are computationally cheap, provided that a set of force-field (FF) parameters is available. In this work, we employed a stochastic algorithm, the adaptive rate Monte Carlo method, to optimize FF parameters of cesium lead halide perovskite (CsPbBr3) NCs passivated with typical organic molecules used in the synthesis of these materials: oleates, phosphonates, sulfonates, and primary and quaternary ammonium ligands. The optimized FF parameters have been obtained against MD reference trajectories computed at the density functional theory level on small NC model systems. We validated our parameters through a comparison of a wide range of nonfitted properties to experimentally available values. With the exception of the NC-phosphonate case, the transferability of the FF model has been successfully tested on realistically sized systems (>5 nm) comprising thousands of passivating organic ligands and solvent molecules, just as those used in experiments.
Understanding the chemico-physical properties of colloidal semiconductor nanocrystals (NCs) requires exploration of the dynamic processes occurring at the NC surfaces, in particular at the ligand-NC interface. Classical molecular dynamics (MD) simulations under realistic conditions are a powerful tool to acquire this knowledge because they have good accuracy and are computationally cheap, provided that a set of force-field (FF) parameters is available. In this work, we employed a stochastic algorithm, the adaptive rate Monte Carlo method, to optimize FF parameters of cesium lead halide perovskite (CsPbBr3) NCs passivated with typical organic molecules used in the synthesis of these materials: oleates, phosphonates, sulfonates, and primary and quaternary ammonium ligands. The optimized FF parameters have been obtained against MD reference trajectories computed at the density functional theory level on small NC model systems. We validated our parameters through a comparison of a wide range of nonfitted properties to experimentally available values. With the exception of the NC-phosphonate case, the transferability of the FF model has been successfully tested on realistically sized systems (>5 nm) comprising thousands of passivating organic ligands and solvent molecules, just as those used in experiments.
During
the past two decades, research on colloidal semiconductor
nanocrystals (NCs) has prompted new applications, ranging from photovoltaics
and photocatalysis[1−12] to optoelectronics,[13−23] thanks to their solution processability and remarkable versatility.
The primary requirement of these materials is the presence of a photoactive
region, represented by a nanometer-sized inorganic semiconductive
crystalline core, surrounded by organic ligands that maintain the
NC colloidally stable. Examples of colloidal NCs include binary metal
chalcogenides, pnictogenides, and ternary perovskites. In particular,
lead-based perovskites with the chemical formula APbX3 (A
being a large monovalent organic or inorganic cation, like methylammonium
or Cs, respectively, and X being a halide anion) are regarded as highly
efficient materials,[24] containing promising
electronic and photophysical properties such as high photoluminescence
quantum yields (PLQYs).[25−28] A comprehensive understanding of colloidal NCs should
not neglect the atomistic processes occurring at their surfaces and
how these influence their optoelectronic characteristics. Over the
past few decades, computational research endeavors in this field helped
in understanding, among many other things, how trap states emerge
at NC surfaces and the importance of including explicitly ligands
in the simulation. These computational works usually focus on the
investigation of ground-state electronic and structural features of
NC systems by employing realistic NC models that can be described
at various levels of theory, most notably density functional theory
(DFT).[29−33] However, the high computational cost of DFT sets a definite upper
boundary to the feasibility of NC models, both in terms of their dimensions
(reaching at most 3–4 nm)[34] and
simulation time spans (usually no longer than 5 ps with molecular
dynamics simulations).[35,36] If one wants to include ligands
and solvents, as it is done in experiments, and understand with greater
detail surface processes, then a computationally much cheaper alternative
to ab initio simulations must be chosen. A valid
approach is indeed based on classical MD simulations,[35−37] which utilize classical potential energy functions (force fields,
FF). Historically speaking, FFs have been utilized extensively for
(bio-)organic molecules,[38,39] while only minor endeavors
have attempted to use them for inorganic materials. This is largely
a consequence of FF parameters that are usually insufficiently accurate
for inorganic elements and thus have a limited availability.In this work, we optimized FF parameters for CsPbBr3 perovskite
NC models, including also the passivating ligands. In
our procedure, the FF parameters are fitted against DFT references
by means of a stochastic algorithm known as adaptive rate Monte Carlo
(ARMC),[36] which involves a comparison of
nonfitted properties to their DFT-computed equivalents and a prediction
of a range of structural properties available in the existing literature
from both theoretical and experimental standpoints. We then demonstrated
the scalability of the newly developed FF model on upscaled sized
systems, mirroring those used in experiments.
Computational Details
NC Model
As a measure to ensure effective solubilization,
NCs are synthesized by a nucleation and growth process in a setup
involving the reaction of molecular precursors, i.e., metallo-organic species where the organic part is composed of long-tail
organic molecules, whose anchoring groups ultimately contribute to
capping the surface of the NC inorganic core. High ligand coverages
are known to maximize the stability of the NC, reducing the formation
of trap states and increasing the photoluminescence quantum yields
of these materials.[31,40−43] In particular, CsPbBr3 NCs are usually capped with anionic and cationic ligands containing
long aliphatic chains, such as oleate[44] and oleylammonium molecules, as well as quaternary ammonium bromide
(e.g., DDAB).[25] Sulfonic[45] and phosphonic acid[41] ligands, most notably oleylphosphonic acids (OLPA) and dodecylbenzene
sulfonic acid (DBSA),[46] have also been
regarded as feasible candidates for the capping of perovskite cores
due to their affinity for Pb2+ cations. Further attempts
by Krieg et al.[45] have
also suggested that the capping of perovskite cores by zwitterionic
ligands is an effective strategy in enhancing their PLQY and increasing
their stability in apolar solvents.A computational investigation
of these materials, to reproduce what is done in experiments, should
thus include both ligands, solvent molecules and realistically sized
NC inorganic core models. In the case of classical FF approaches,
paramount is the accuracy of those parameters that enter the potential
energy function. Past research endeavors have successfully developed
FFs targeted at the description of noncovalent interactions between
inorganic ions in bulk hybrid organic/inorganic perovskite materials,[35,47−51] where the charges entering the Coulombic term were fitted against ab initio computed data. However, the inherently high surface/volume
ratio in NCs necessitates accounting for the surface, which is not
included in bulk solids.[40,52] This brings us to a
total of four contributions necessary to parametrize NCs:the interaction among
the ions/species
of the NC core,the
ligand–NC interactions,
in particular of the ligand anchoring group directly attached to the
NC surface,the interaction
of the surface with
the ligand atoms located on the more distant, apolar portions of the
organic tails, andthe
interligand/ligand and ligand/solvent
interactions.For the last point, an
FF is required that describes known organic
solvents and ligands, typical molecules for which bonded and nonbonded
parameters are mostly available via FFs like CHARMM[53] or AMBER.[54,55] In the case of organic species
for which FF parameters are not directly available, we will rely on
the MATCH program,[56] which automatically
generates CHARMM-based atom types and FF parameters by comparison
of molecular fragments. Furthermore, while the long-range energetic
contributions of point 3 above are marginal, excluding them in their
entirety possesses the risk of the NC and ligand tails to collapse
due to the absence of a repulsive potential. For this reason, we decided
to generate the Lennard-Jones parameters acting between the NC core
and the organic tails using the combination rule on (comparatively)
less accurate force-field parameters that span the entire periodic
table (e.g., a UFF[57]).
Finally, over the course of this work, we focus our attention to points
(1) and (2), i.e., to parametrize the pair-specific
interactions between the inorganic core ions and between the inorganic
core and the anchoring group of the ligands bound to the NC surface.
Once again, this choice can be motivated by the demand to simultaneously
maximize the precision of the calculation and minimize the risk of
the overfitting of the model. A schematic view of our strategy is
depicted in Scheme a.
Scheme 1
(a) Different Force-Field Components (Interactions) and Respective
Descriptions in an Oleate-Capped CsPbBr3 NC Solvated in
Octadecene and (b) Adaptive Rate Monte Carlo Parametrization Workflow
Force-Field Model
The interactions
between the NC core
ions and between the NC core and the anchoring group of the ligands
are represented by the effective pairwise-addictive potential:The first term in
the equation
is the Lennard-Jones (LJ) 12-6 potential, encompassing both the van
der Waals interactions and the Pauli repulsions: here, the well depth
and the interatomic distance are respectively accounted for by the
terms ε and σ. The second term measures the Coulombic electrostatic
interaction acting between the point charges q of
the ith and jth atoms. This potential
energy function has already delivered promising results in earlier
parametrizations by Rabani[50] and by Cosseddu
and Infante[36] on CdSe NC models, providing
a good compromise between performance and accuracy. An important feature
of this model is that the NC–ligand description neglects covalent
contributions that would otherwise bind the ligands to their anchoring
sites, decreasing the overall flexibility of the FF. Within the expression
in (1), the dominant parameters are the charges and the σ terms, whereas the ε parameters are kept constant and precomputed at
the universal force-field (UFF)[57] level
of theory, as it was observed that variations in ε have little effect on the quality of the fit (vide infra). As an additional measure, the parameters employed
in the FF model to treat the interior atoms and the surface atoms
of the NC are identical. Although this may seem at odds with chemical
intuition, this choice is motivated by the need to account for three
features:the
transferability of the potential
energy functions on larger-scaled systems,the presence of ion exchange reactions
between the core and surface atoms of the NC that usually occur in
experiments, anda reduction
of the number of parameters
to be fitted that prevents issues connected to overfitting.
Force-Field Parametrization
The
main assumption at
the basis of our FF parametrization procedure is that all physical
properties calculated by means of classical molecular mechanics (MM)
are expected to converge to those calculated with a reference ab initio method. A crucial requirement is therefore the
choice of the property onto which the parameters are fitted. To this
aim, we decided to focus on the radial distribution function (RDF), i.e., the probability to find a pair of atoms i and j at a given distance r. The RDF has the advantageous characteristic that it directly
maps, via a Boltzmann inversion, to the potential of mean force F acting between a pair of atoms:[58]where g(r) is the RDF, kB is the Boltzmann constant, T is the temperature
of the system, and C is a generic constant. The error
function itself consists of two terms: a reference QM potential energy
surface descriptor (i.e., the RDF) and the to-be-fitted
MM counterpart. In eq , this is represented by N vector pairs gQM and gMM (one
RDF for each atom pair), each consisting of M grid
points on which the RDF is evaluated:We decided to fit the RDF
and not F itself because fitting the latter would
result in infinite values for those points of the potential energy
surface only little sampled during the reference DFT trajectory. RDF
plots, on the other hand, give out zero values for the same points,
thus preventing divergence of the error function. The workflow for
our FF parametrization is implemented through the following steps,
which are represented schematically in Scheme b: a reference NC model is prepared, and
an MD trajectory 5–10 ps-long is calculated using density functional
theory (DFT; see the Computational Details section).[59] An initial set of FF parameters
is guessed to run a preliminary MM-MD simulation, and the error function
is computed. The classical FF parameters are then updated on the fly
through a specific procedure, known as the adaptive rate Monte Carlo[36] (ARMC) algorithm, an automated stochastic procedure.
The calculation is manually stopped once a sufficiently accurate set
of parameters has been acquired.The overfitting of the model
is averted with the help of an extra validation set consisting of
angular distribution functions (ADFs), root-mean-square fluctuation
and displacement (RMSF and RMSD), bulk modulus, and Young’s
modulus. These properties are compared to both ab initio computed and experimentally available values.[60−63] In addition, the risk of overfitting
is reduced by limiting the size of the parameter space. This is accomplished
via the inclusion of charge constraints (vide infra), as well as a reduction in the number of fitting parameters (i.e., some parameters are set as constant in the model)
while retaining an overall low error value.
Preparation of the NC Models
A NC model presenting
a 2.3 nm diameter was built by cutting the facets of a cubic CsPbBr3 lattice (space group Pm3̅m) through the (001) directions so that the layer containing Cs and
Br atoms would be exposed to the surface. This choice shows good agreement
with experimentally available information on the Pb:Br molar ratios
that strongly suggest a CsBr type of termination,[16,17] and it has already been successfully applied in previous computational
simulations involving metal halide perovskite cores.[31,33,64] Cs cations were additionally
removed from the surface of the inorganic core in order to achieve
a neutral, charge-balanced Cs112Pb64Br240 model. Organic ligand molecules in an ionic form were then set to
replace a given percentage, i.e., coverage, ranging
from 14 to 38%, of surface ions of the same overall charge (i.e., Br for anionic ligands and Cs for cationic ligands),
as to preserve the neutrality of the model (see later for further
details on the NC–ligand systems). Overall, a total of six
NC–ligand models were fitted in this work: one CsPbBr3 inorganic core without ligands; three CsPbBr3 models
passivated with anionic ligands, i.e., acetate, methylphosphonate,
and methylsulfonate; and CsPbBr3 models passivated with
the cationic ligands methylammonium (a primary amine) and trimethyl
propylammonium (a quaternary amine). Short organic moieties (i.e., methyl and isopropyl groups) were purposely used for
the NC models as to minimize the computational load of the reference
DFT calculations. The selected anchoring groups are representative
of the most commonly employed ligands in experiments.[41,65−70] A representation of the investigated systems is provided in Figure .
Figure 1
Snapshots of the NC models
parametrized in this work: (a) inorganic
CsPbBr3 core and nanocrystal models capped with (b) acetate,
(c) methylphosphonate, (d) methylsulfonate, (e) methylammonium (a
primary amine), and (f) trimethyl propylammonium (a quaternary amine).
Snapshots of the NC models
parametrized in this work: (a) inorganic
CsPbBr3 core and nanocrystal models capped with (b) acetate,
(c) methylphosphonate, (d) methylsulfonate, (e) methylammonium (a
primary amine), and (f) trimethyl propylammonium (a quaternary amine).
Simulation Details
Ab initio QM-MD
simulations have been conducted on the aforementioned NC models at
the DFT/PBE/DZVP level of theory, utilizing the Perdew–Burke–Ernzerhof
(PBE) exchange–correlation functional[71] and a double-ζ basis set with polarization functions (DZVP)
as implemented in the CP2K 6.1 quantum chemical package.[72,73] This level of theory is regarded as an adequate choice for the description
of the properties and features of interest in other families of semiconductor
NCs.[74] The ARMC parametrization procedure
was then executed using the Auto-FOX package[75] to fit the FF parameters. For each set of parameters, MM-MD simulations
were run with a smooth particle mesh Euler method (SPME) using beta-Euler
splines[76] for the computation of the LJ
and Coulombic terms.The spacing between consecutive grid points
was set to be 0.62 Å. For both the QM-MD simulations and the
classical MM ones, cubic cells of 40 and 100 Å, respectively,
have been chosen, purposely exceeding the NC dimensions and thus leaving
vacuum on the sides of the simulation box. The integration steps were
chosen to be 2.5 fs when involving the NC core without ligands, while
a 1 fs time step was chosen for the ligand-capped NCs. The simulations
were run while keeping a constant particle number N, constant volume V, and constant temperature T (NVT, canonical ensemble). The temperature of 300 K was
maintained constant in the simulations by means of a velocity-rescaling
thermostat.[77] Canonical simulations were
run for 10,000 steps, resulting in MD simulations ranging from 10
to 25 ps in total.
Force-Field Parameters
The sets
of charges and LJ parameters
in eq that have been
fitted over the course of this work satisfy a set of constraints that
are described below.
The Point Charges (q) of
the NC Core
For our perovskite model, CsPbBr3,
the charges have been
forced to preserve an overall Cs:Pb:Br ratio of 1:2:–1 according
to their most stable oxidation states, i.e., +1 for
Cs, +2 for Pb, and −1 for Br in our CsPbBr3 model.
These constraints have been applied to the parameters, ensuring that
in the case of the detachment of ionic couples from the surface of
the core (e.g., CsBr), both the NC and the detached
moiety would preserve an overall neutral charge, improving the transferability
of the parameters to larger sizes.
The Charges (q) of the Ligands
The
total charge of each ligand was constrained to balance that of the
atom that it was replacing (Br for anionic monovalent ligands and
Cs for their cationic counterparts). As an additional measure, only
the charges in the anchoring groups, closer to the inorganic core
and thus accounting for stronger electrostatic interactions, were
fitted. The remaining charges, i.e., those of the
atoms located on the ligand tails, were kept frozen (i.e., their values were not optimized). Their fixed values were taken
from the well-established CHARMM FF[53] using
the MATCH program.
The LJ Parameters (ε and σ) of
the NC
The
well depth (ε) and interatomic distances (σ) of the atom
pairs of interest providing a description of both the interactions
in the inorganic core (e.g., Cs–Cs and Pb–Br)
and those between the NC core and the organic anchoring groups of
the ligands (such as, for instance, Br–C and Cs–O) were
fitted, whereas the remaining terms, i.e., those
between the core atoms and the distant ligand tails account for marginal
energetic contributions and were kept fixed. In addition, because
the potential is dominated by electrostatic and short-repulsive interactions
(i.e., the sigma term), we considered the well depth
epsilon value of secondary importance. Indeed, even a large change
around a precomputed value at the UFF level of theory has little effect
on the shape of the RDF. The initial values for these parameters were
guessed from the DFT-computed RDFs of the individual atom pairs. Additionally,
milder constraints were applied to the interatomic distances as a
measure to ensure that their values did not fall within the repulsive
region of the Lennard-Jones energy well, disrupting the stability
of the systems.
Results and Discussion
Force-Field Fitting
As a first step, we decided to
optimize the FF parameters characterizing only the inorganic core,
formally taking a NC without ligands. The RDFs obtained using the
MM-computed FF parameters displayed an excellent convergence toward
the reference DFT plots, with errors as low as 0.035 for the best
set of parameters (Figure a). This preliminary optimization served as a tool to obtain
starting parameters for the successive, more complex parametrizations
of the NC–ligand systems. In the latter case, the best results, i.e., those associated with the lowest relative errors,
obtained for the potential energy function are presented in Table .
Figure 2
(a) Relative errors obtained
for the accepted MD iterations during
the ARMC fitting, over a maximum of 1500 iterations. (b) Example of
the comparison between ab initio computed RDFs (QM-MD,
orange line) and classical RDFs (MM-MD, blue line), computed using
the ARMC-optimized FF parameters, for the phosphonate-capped NC model
at the first iteration and at the best iteration. (c) Comparison between
the QM (orange line) and MM (blue line) potential of mean force computed
using eq from the provided
RDFs. Altogether, the following ligand charges have been taken into
account (in parentheses are the name types according to CHARMM FFs):
for carboxylate-based acetate, the carboxylic C (C2O3) and the two
oxygens (O2D2); for phosphonate, P (PG1), the two O atoms connected
by a single bond (O2P1) and the oxygen connected by a double bond
(O311); the charges of the sulfur atom (S3O1) and of the negatively
charged oxygen atoms bound to it (O2S1) for sulfonate; the nitrogen
atom (N3P3) and the hydrogens (HGP2) in the primary amine and nitrogen
(N3P0) and hydrogen (HGP5) charges, as well as those of the adjacent
carbon atoms C334 for the methyl and C324 for the methylene bound
to the propyl group for the quaternary ammonium cation, trimethyl
propylammonium.
Table 1
Calculated Force-Field
Parameters
for the CsPbBr3 Perovskite NC Core and the Ligand-Capped
NCa
NC core
acetate
phosphonate
sulfonate
primary amine
quaternary amine
Charges (NC core)
Cs
0.5068
0.5519
0.7794
0.5180
0.6354
0.4678
Pb
1.0136
1.1038
1.5588
1.0360
1.2708
0.9356
Br
–0.5068
–0.5519
–0.7794
–0.5180
–0.56354
–0.4678
σ (NC core)
Cs Cs
0.462
0.541
0.370
0.489
0.442
0.438
Cs Pb
0.354
0.390
0.364
0.329
0.3657
0.372
Cs Br
0.396
0.372
0.398
0.394
0.396
0.378
Pb Br
0.306
0.303
0.327
0.314
0.314
0.309
Pb Pb
0.604
0.643
0.632
0.621
0.632
0.620
Br Br
0.420
0.386
0.389
0.379
0.405
0.373
Charges (ligand
anchors)
O2D2
–0.4143
O2P1
–0.7381
O2S1
–0.2675
N3P3
–0.2792
N3P0
–0.2806
C2O3
0.3766
O311
–0.6179
S3O1
0.3845
HGP2
0.2482
C334
–0.1637
PG1
1.4247
C324
–0.047
HGP1
0.3600
HGP5
0.1170
σ (ligand
anchors to the NC core)
Cs C2O3
0.425
Cs O2P1
0.353
Cs
O2S1
0.249
Cs N3P3
0.498
Cs N3P0
0.465
Pb C2O3
0.291
Pb O2P1
0.281
Pb O2S1
0.270
Pb N3P3
0.384
Pb N3P0
0.560
Br C2O3
0.288
Br O2P1
0.316
Br O2S1
0.395
Br N3P3
0.353
Br N3P0
0.448
Cs O2D2
0.331
Cs O311
0.341
Cs S3O1
0.470
Cs HGP2
0.349
Cs C334
0.327
Pb O2D2
0.275
Pb O311
0.212
Pb S3O1
0.296
Pb HGP2
0.288
Pb C334
0.384
Br O2D2
0.361
Br O311
0.343
Br S3O1
0.347
Br HGP2
0.144
Br C334
0.360
Cs PG1
0.411
Cs
C324
0.380
Pb PG1
0.228
Pb C324
0.380
Br PG1
0.393
Br C324
0.271
Cs HGP1
0.136
Cs HGP5
0.277
Pb HGP1
0.335
Pb HGP5
0.265
Br HGP1
0.223
Br HGP5
0.196
Charges (q)
are provided in elementary charge units, while the distances (σ)
are reported in nm. Units are the default ones employed by the CP2K
package.
(a) Relative errors obtained
for the accepted MD iterations during
the ARMC fitting, over a maximum of 1500 iterations. (b) Example of
the comparison between ab initio computed RDFs (QM-MD,
orange line) and classical RDFs (MM-MD, blue line), computed using
the ARMC-optimized FF parameters, for the phosphonate-capped NC model
at the first iteration and at the best iteration. (c) Comparison between
the QM (orange line) and MM (blue line) potential of mean force computed
using eq from the provided
RDFs. Altogether, the following ligand charges have been taken into
account (in parentheses are the name types according to CHARMM FFs):
for carboxylate-based acetate, the carboxylic C (C2O3) and the two
oxygens (O2D2); for phosphonate, P (PG1), the two O atoms connected
by a single bond (O2P1) and the oxygen connected by a double bond
(O311); the charges of the sulfur atom (S3O1) and of the negatively
charged oxygen atoms bound to it (O2S1) for sulfonate; the nitrogen
atom (N3P3) and the hydrogens (HGP2) in the primary amine and nitrogen
(N3P0) and hydrogen (HGP5) charges, as well as those of the adjacent
carbon atoms C334 for the methyl and C324 for the methylene bound
to the propyl group for the quaternary ammonium cation, trimethyl
propylammonium.Charges (q)
are provided in elementary charge units, while the distances (σ)
are reported in nm. Units are the default ones employed by the CP2K
package.Once again, the
RDFs obtained with the MM-fitted values display
very good agreement with the DFT reference: the best set of parameters
is obtained for the NC model capped by the primary amine where the
computed errors reached a minimum of 0.015. A representation of the
trend of the error function for the core parameters and those of the
NC models is presented in Figure a. Figure b, on the other hand, provides a comparison between the RDF
plots achieved with the best parameters and the reference ones computed
by DFT. Additionally, eq was applied to the RDFs to compute the potential of mean force of
the different core atom pairs. Examples of the plots obtained of these
functions, once again displaying a agreement with the DFT reference
plots, are shown in Figure c.A less accurate set of parameters, on the other hand,
was found
for the NC model containing phosphonate ligands. We attribute the
inaccuracies found in this NC model to two reasons: (1) a low quality
of the MATCH FFs for the bare phosphonate ligand as evidenced by a
discrepancy on the relaxed structure of the ligand alone obtained
with DFT and the default MATCH parameters; (2) the oversimplified
FF based on the Lennard-Jones and Coulombic terms only, whereas the
polarization contribution may further improve the interaction between
the anchor and the NC surface ions. This aspect will be analyzed with
greater detail in the future.In addition to the above, our
fitting scheme allows for a further
refinement of the FF parameters, for example, by fitting simultaneously
multiple DFT-MD trajectories where the NC is capped by different types
of ligands. We provided an example of such simultaneous optimization
by fitting the acetate-capped and the methyl ammonium-capped DFT trajectories
at 300 K in the Supporting Information (see Table S9) considering that in the experiments,
a CsPbBr3 NC is passivated with both oleate and oleylammonium.
In this fit, the charge neutrality of the system is ensured by the
previously established constraints: the ratios between the atom charges
in the inorganic core are preserved, and the charges of the ligands
are set to balance the atoms that they are replacing (Br for acetates
and Cs for primary amines).
Validation of the Method
The validation
of the newly
optimized potential energy function, i.e., the proof
of concept of the accuracy of the fitting, can be divided into two
main approaches: (1) the validation of MM-calculated nonfitted properties
to their DFT-computed equivalents; (2) the prediction of structural
properties of the material in comparison to available experimental
values. In the first step, we predicted the MM angular distribution
functions g(θ) (ADFs), i.e., the measure of the probability to
find three atoms i, j, and k at a given angle θ, for the angle formed between two lead atoms and one bromine atom
in the model structures, i.e., between adjacent octahedra
in the crystal lattice. In agreement with experimental findings,[78,79] previous computational investigations on CsPbBr3 models
had highlighted a deviation from the 90° angle corresponding
to the cubic structure toward an orthorhombically distorted crystal
structure.[31,80] This trend, correctly represented
in the reference DFT angular distribution functions, is indeed well-reproduced
by the plotted MM functions in Figure .
Figure 3
Comparison between ab initio computed
ADFs (QM-MD,
orange line) and classical ADFs (MM-MD, blue line) for the Pb–Br–Pb
angle (between two nearby octahedra), predicted using the best ARMC-optimized
FF parameters, for the inorganic core and the ligand-capped NC models.
Comparison between ab initio computed
ADFs (QM-MD,
orange line) and classical ADFs (MM-MD, blue line) for the Pb–Br–Pb
angle (between two nearby octahedra), predicted using the best ARMC-optimized
FF parameters, for the inorganic core and the ligand-capped NC models.As an additional validation, we calculated the
root-mean-square
displacement (RMSD) for each atom type and its time-averaged equivalent,
known as the root-mean-square fluctuation (RMSF). These functions
are a measure of the spatial extent of the motions of the atoms, and
the comparison between these classically derived functions and their
DFT equivalents is expected to provide similar average values if the
dynamical properties of the system are accurately represented by the
FF. The DFT- and MM-based RMSD and RMSF plots are provided in Figure , and they indeed
show good agreement, further outlining the effectiveness of the FF-based
representation in the MD simulations. A similar procedure has been
employed for the calculations of the binding energies of the ligand–ion
couples to the entire NC model. The calculated values, provided in
the Supporting Information of this manuscript
(Table S8), show only qualitative agreement
between the DFT- and MM-calculated energies. The discrepancies between
the DFT and the MM energies range from a maximum discrepancy for phosphonate
(∼26 kcal/mol) to the 0.7 kcal/mol deviation found for the
methylammonium case. We must point out, however, that a good description
of the binding energies needs to correctly account for the individual
ligand–ion couples; thus, a balanced set of FF parameters can
be obtained by including in the fitting protocol both the NC–ligand
species (reactants) and ligand–ion couples (products).
Figure 4
RMSD and RMSF
plots: comparison between ab initio computed (QM-MD)
and classically predicted properties using the
best set of parameters fitted with the ARMC procedure (MM-MD), for
the inorganic core and the ligand-capped NC models.
RMSD and RMSF
plots: comparison between ab initio computed (QM-MD)
and classically predicted properties using the
best set of parameters fitted with the ARMC procedure (MM-MD), for
the inorganic core and the ligand-capped NC models.To further improve our validation, Auto-FOX has been employed
in
conjunction with another package, TRAVIS,[83−86] for the calculation of the power
spectra of the systems obtained from the Fourier transform of the
autocorrelation functions of the atomic velocities (VACF), i.e., their vibrational densities of states (vDOS). These
quantities can in fact be obtained from the DFT-MD trajectories and
the MM-MD trajectories. The resulting spectra projected on the core
atoms and the ligands are provided in the Supporting Information. The comparison between the DFT results and their
classical equivalents has resulted in good agreement between the main
peaks of the vDOS. The biggest uncertainties were found for the spectra
of the atomic ligands; however, these can be attributed to the force
constants of the atoms in the ligand tails that are not optimized
here and have been retrieved from the literature (CHARMM force fields).
The follow-up step in the validation of the ARMC fitting of the NC
models involves the evaluation of several mechanical properties of
the material. The Voigt–Reuss–Hill average of the bulk
and Young’s moduli was computed by applying the newly optimized
FF parameters for a bulk CsPbBr3 lattice using the GULP
software.[81] Given the intrinsically anisotropic
nature of the Young’s modulus, the values in Table account for predictions and/or
measurements occurring on the (101) face of the bulk structure. As
an additional comparison, the bulk modulus was computed numerically
and extrapolated by a nonlinear fitting of the Birch–Murnaghan
equation of state (BMEOS).[87]
Table 2
Calculated Theoretical and Structural
Properties for the CsPbBr3 Perovskite Bulk, the NC Core,
and the Ligand-Capped NC: The Binding Energy (kcal mol–1), Bulk Modulus (GPa), and Young’s Modulus (GPa)a
Bulk Modulus (GPa)
analytical
value (GULP[81] and VRH average[82])
ref[60]
ref[61]
ref[62]
acetate
phosphonate
sulfonate
primary amine
quaternary
amine
NC core
bulk
bulk
bulk
bulk
12.1
20.0
10.7
15.1
10.3
10.8
9.7
15.5
23.5
21
Their units of measurement are the
default ones employed by the GULP package:[81] both properties are reported in GPa.
Their units of measurement are the
default ones employed by the GULP package:[81] both properties are reported in GPa.This equation is a function of the lattice energies E at different cell volumes V, E(V), for infinitesimal cell deformations,
under
the validity of Hooke’s law. E0 and B0 respectively account for the
energy and the bulk modulus computed for the system at the reference
volume V0, B0′ is the
derivative of B0 with respect to the pressure.
Once again, Table provides a comparison of the computed values to the bulk modulus
calculated from the DFT-optimized geometry of the bulk at different
compression factors and to the experimental,[60] computational,[61] and semiempirical[62] measurements available in the literature, outlining
the excellent agreement between these data and values obtained using
the different FF parameters. The deviations visible in the NC models
depicting the ligand-capped models and the inorganic core, on the
other hand, can be ascribed to the interplay of the ligands with the
NC core in the finite-sized NC systems.[40,52] This contribution
modifies the inorganic core parameters ultimately affecting bulk and
Young’s moduli.
Transferability to Larger Sizes
The last validation
of our parametrization scheme has involved testing the scalability
of the newly developed FF parameters on a more realistic model:[44] a 5.0 nm-sized CsPbBr3 NC, CsBr-terminated,
capped with typical long chain ligands employed in previously established
synthetic protocols, namely, oleate (OA–),[25] oleylammonium (OLAH+),[45] didodecyldimethylammonium bromide (DDAB),[68,70] oleylphosphonic acids (OLPA),[88] and dodecylbenzene
sulfonic acid (DBAS[46]), in longer MD simulations.
In a parallel fashion to the downsized systems, anionic ligands were
set to replace Br atoms and cationic ligands replaced Cs atoms to
preserve the charge neutrality of the NC models. Other than the DDAB-capped
NC, exhibiting a 40% coverage, which was deemed to be closer to the
experimental findings for these systems,[31,89] a 60% ligand coverage was chosen for all the remaining ligand-capped
NC models. The simulations were run keeping an NVT ensemble, with
a constant temperature of 300 K. Canonical simulations were run for
one million steps of 1 fs each resulting in MD simulations of 1 ns
in total. A comparison of the ADFs between the acetate-capped 2.3
nm CsPbBr3 core employed in the fitting procedure at the
DFT level of theory, an upscaled equivalent oleate-capped 5.0 nm NC,
and a CsPbBr3 bulk structure computed using the optimized
FF parameters at the MM level of theory is provided in Figure . ADFs provide a measure of
the preservation of the integrity of the orthorhombic nature both
in the bulk structures and in the NC models, regardless of the dimension
of the lattice. This feature, which has been proven experimentally
by Cottingham and Brutchey[90] and by ten
Brinck and Infante[33] through theoretical
models, further corroborates the effectiveness of the newly developed
FF in the prediction of the structural properties of CsPbBr3 NC models. Plots containing their average total energies (i.e., the sum of their kinetic and potential energies) are
provided in the Supporting Information,
highlighting the achievement of a substantial equilibration of the
energies and temperatures in the MD simulations and thus deemed to
provide stable systems.
Figure 5
Comparison between the ADFs of the Pb–Br–Pb
angle
obtained for the downscaled 2.3 nm NC model capped by oleate ligands
(blue plot), for the upscaled 5.0 nm NC model capped by oleate ligands
(red plot) in vacuum, and for the bulk structure (green plot), plotted
from MM-MD simulations obtained using the best ARMC-optimized FF parameters.
Comparison between the ADFs of the Pb–Br–Pb
angle
obtained for the downscaled 2.3 nm NC model capped by oleate ligands
(blue plot), for the upscaled 5.0 nm NC model capped by oleate ligands
(red plot) in vacuum, and for the bulk structure (green plot), plotted
from MM-MD simulations obtained using the best ARMC-optimized FF parameters.
Conclusions
Over the course of this
work, we carried out FF parametrizations
of the most common ligand-capped CsPbBr3 NC models, as
well as of their bare inorganic core, based upon the stochastic adaptive
rate Monte Carlo parametrization algorithm.[36] We have consequently validated the robustness of our ARMC-optimized
FF parameters via comparison with both computational (ab initio) as well as experimental data. The classical force fields obtained
with the newly developed parameters provide an efficient, computationally
feasible methodology for the description of the structural and time-dependent
dynamics of perovskite NCs, paving the way toward long timescale simulations
of more realistically sized systems, involving the explicit inclusion
of solvent molecules as well as ligand chains. We tested several NC–ligand
combinations, and we obtained good results for all with the exception
of the NC–phosphonate case. Here, we speculate that the starting
FF parameters of the phosphonate alone are already flawed; however,
this aspect requires further investigations.
Authors: Martin Thomas; Martin Brehm; Reinhold Fligg; Peter Vöhringer; Barbara Kirchner Journal: Phys Chem Chem Phys Date: 2013-02-18 Impact factor: 3.676
Authors: Samuel D Stranks; Giles E Eperon; Giulia Grancini; Christopher Menelaou; Marcelo J P Alcocer; Tomas Leijtens; Laura M Herz; Annamaria Petrozza; Henry J Snaith Journal: Science Date: 2013-10-18 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Maryna I Bodnarchuk; Simon C Boehme; Stephanie Ten Brinck; Caterina Bernasconi; Yevhen Shynkarenko; Franziska Krieg; Roland Widmer; Beat Aeschlimann; Detlef Günther; Maksym V Kovalenko; Ivan Infante Journal: ACS Energy Lett Date: 2018-11-27 Impact factor: 23.101