Formation of Ion Pairs and Charge-Transfer Complexes in the p-Doping of Organic Semiconductors
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The formation of ion pairs (IPA) through integer charge transfer and ground-state charge-transfer complexes (CPXs) with only fractional charge transfer are the two known mechanisms in the molecular doping of conjugated polymers and molecules, which form the material class of organic semiconductors (OSCs). As it entails no immediate ionization of the OSC, CPX formation is regarded as detrimental to the doping efficiency. For IPA formation to occur, a match between the electron affinity (EA) of the p-dopant and the ionization energy (IE) of the OSC is expected as crucial, while their pronounced frontier molecular orbital overlap should promote CPX formation instead [1]. To explore these complementary scenarios, we first studied the thermal de-doping of the prototypical conjugated polymer poly(3-hexylthiophene) (P3HT), p-doped with the common strong electron acceptor tetrafluoro-tetracyanoquinodimethane (F4TCNQ) [2]. We combined grazing incidence X-ray diffraction (GIXRD) with Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) to determine the microstructure, and absorbance spectroscopy (UV/vis/NIR) to observe the spectral fingerprint of the two doping scenarios. We found two microstructural environments through their distinguished thermal stabilities, where, the dopants were observed (i) alternatingly stacked with the polymer backbone as well as (ii) dispersed in its sidechain region. From FTIR and UV/vis/NIR we deduce that all dopants are fully ionized, although packing between dopant and polymer backbone would be expected to favor CPX formation instead. Notably, while characteristic shifts of the mid-infrared cyano-stretch modes of TCNQ derivatives are known to well indicate the degree of charge transfer, we show here that they allow further to assess the dopant site in the polymer environment. We further investigated the influence of EA with respect to IE by contrasting F4TCNQ with its derivatives of lower degree of fluorination, which translates into reduced EA while leaving the spatial aspects of the dopant largely intact. We find that using F2TCNQ and FTCNQ still results in IPA formation in spite of EA < IE, which we understand through the lower degree of spatial, and therefore energetic order in OSCs as compared to inorganic semiconductors, which therefore possess no sharp band edges. Surprisingly, at high doping concentrations (additional) CPX formation occurred for all the differently strong dopants, which highlights the complexity of these systems going beyond the sole impact of the energetics of the individual constituents. Finally, we juxtaposed the known tendency of small molecular OSCs to form CPXs and that of polymer OSCs to form IPAs. To maximize the comparability with P3HT, alkylated oligothiophenes of different length were synthesized in-house (from 4 to 10 thiophene repeat units) and doped with F4TCNQ. For the longest oligomer, we were able to observe the switch from the CPX regime into that of IPA, i.e., we approach the doping behavior polymer limit. Knowing this threshold is valuable for applications in organic electronics where vacuum processible small molecular OSCs are preferred over polymeric OSCs, which are only processible via solution-based methods. [1] I. Salzmann, G. Heimel, M. Oehzelt, S. Winkler, N. Koch, Acc. Chem. Res. 2016, 49, 370. [2] H. Hase, K. O’Neill, J. Frisch, A. Opitz, N. Koch, I. Salzmann, The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 2018, 122, 25893.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».