More Like this

1. Charge Transport in Ternary Charge‐Transfer Solid Solution Single Crystals

   https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.202523425  

   Novak, Jonathan C; Makala, Manikanta; MacKenzie, Edith L; Coropceanu, Veaceslav; Agosto, Kimberly; Moravek, Abigail A; Jurchescu, Oana D; Wiscons, Ren A (November 2025, Advanced Functional Materials)

   Abstract The electronic effects of structural defects introduced through chemical doping are challenging to characterize in organic semiconductors, especially when measured in thin film devices where the performance is sensitive to structural heterogeneity. Here, a simple approach is presented to probe the roles of indirect and direct electronic coupling on charge transport in a series of compositionally varied charge‐transfer single crystals. In this system, carbazole (CBZ) is controllably substituted withN‐methylcarbazole (NMCBZ) in the cocrystal formed between CBZ and 1,3,4,5,7,8‐hexafluoro‐11,11,12,12‐tetracyano‐2,6‐naphthoquinodimethane (F₆TNAP), producing a series of single crystals with compositions that range between 0 – 50% CBZ replacement and preserve the structure type of the parent cocrystal. Gas‐phase electronic structure calculations predict that substitutional replacement of CBZ with NMCBZ introduces two competing effects: (i) strengthening of indirect coupling by increasing the average degree of charge transfer and (ii) weakening of direct exchange by increasing the distance between adjacent charge‐transfer π‐stacks. Charge transport measurements reveal an initial decrease in the mobility upon substitution of CBZ with NMCBZ, rationalized by a combination of hole‐trapping and weakened direct coupling with increasing NMCBZ content. Critically, these results demonstrate the potential for solid solutions to offer insight into charge transport mechanisms and their chemical tunability in molecular electronic materials. 

   more » « less
2. Dynamic jet charge

   https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.103.074028  

   Kang, Zhong-Bo; Liu, Xiaohui; Mantry, Sonny; Spraker, M. C.; Wilson, Tyler (April 2021, Physical Review D)

   null (Ed.)
3. Charge transport and space charge dynamics in EPDM/2D-nanoclay composite dielectrics

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2021.109241  

   Arab Baferani, Mohamadreza; Wu, Chao; Cao, Yang (March 2022, Composites Science and Technology)
4. Is it common for charge recombination to be faster than charge separation?

   https://doi.org/10.1002/kin.21285  

   Espinoza, Eli M.; Bao, Duoduo; Krzeszewski, Maciej; Gryko, Daniel T.; Vullev, Valentine I. (May 2019, International Journal of Chemical Kinetics)

   Abstract Attaining long‐lived charge‐transfer (CT) states is of the utmost importance for energy science, photocatalysis, and materials engineering. When charge separation (CS) is slower than consequent charge recombination (CR), formation of a CT state is not apparent, yet the CT process provides parallel pathways for deactivation of electronically excited systems. The nuclear, or Franck‐Condon (FC), contributions to the CT kinetics, as implemented by various formalisms based on the Marcus transition‐state theory, provide an excellent platform for designing systems that produce long‐lived CT states. Such approaches, however, tend to underestimate the complexity of alternative parameters that govern CT kinetics. Here we show a comparative analysis of two systems that have quite similar FC CT characteristics but manifest distinctly different CT kinetics. A decrease in the donor‐acceptor electronic coupling during the charge‐separation step provides an alternative route for slowing down undesired charge recombination. These examples suggest that, while infrequently reported and discussed, cases where CR is faster than CS are not necessarily rare occurrences. 

   more » « less
5. Influence of Charge Regulation and Charge Heterogeneity on Complexation between Polyelectrolytes and Proteins

   https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcb.0c02007  

   Samanta, Rituparna; Halabe, Avni; Ganesan, Venkat (June 2020, The Journal of Physical Chemistry B)