Solvent effects in molecular hyperpolarizability calculations

Chemistry of Materials

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 428-432

  Allin, Shawn B ^a   Leslie, Thomas M ^a   Lumpkin, Richard S ^a  

^a University of Alabama in Huntsville   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0001607692     PISSN: 08974756     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/cm950362j     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Chemla, D. S., Zyss, J., Eds. Nonlinear Optical Properties of Organic Molecules and Crystals; Academic Press: Orlando, 1987; Vols. 1, 2.
2. Marder, S. R., Sohn, J E., Stucky, G. D., Eds. Materials for Nonlinear Optics: Chemical Perspectives; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1991.
3. Burland, D. M.; Rice, J. E.; Downing, J.; Michl, J. SPIE 1991, 1560, 111.
4. Williams, D. J. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Eng. 1984, 23, 690.
5. Dalton, L. R.; Harper, A. W.; Ghosen, R.; Steier, W. H.; Ziari, M., Fetterman, H.; Shi, Y.; Mustacich, R. V.; Jen, A. K.-Y.; Shea, K. J. Chem. Mater. 1995, 7, 1060 and references therein.
6. Kowel, S. T.; Wang, S.; Thomsen, A.; Chan, W.; Leslie, T M.; Wang, N. P. IEEE Photonics Technol. Lett. 1995, 7, 754.
7. Kanis, D. R.; Ratner, M. A.; Marks, T. J. Chem. Rev. 1994, 94, 195 and references therein.
8. Smith, D. A.; Mura, M. E. J. Phys. Chem. 1994, 98, 6903.
9. Matsuzawa, N.; Dixon, D. A. J. Phys. Chem. 1994, 98, 2545.
10. Reichardt, C. Solvent and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry; VCH: Weinheim, Germany, 1990.
11. Stähelin, M.; Burland, D. M.; Rice, J. E. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1992, 191, 245.
12. Robinson, D. W.; Long, C. A. J. Phys. Chem. 1993, 97, 7540.
13. Yoshimura, T. Phys. Rev. B 1989, 40, 6292.
14. Marder, S. R.; Beratan, D. N.; Cheng, L.-T. Science 1991, 252, 103.
15. Marder, S R.; Perry, J. W.; Tiemann, B. G.; Gorman, C. G.; Gilmour, S.; Biddle, S. L.; Bourhill, G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1993, 115, 2524.
16. Meyers, F.; Marder, S. R.; Pierce, B. M.; Brédas, J. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 10703.
17. Bourhill, G.; Brédas, J. L.; Cheng, L.-T.; Marder, S. R.; Meyers, F., Perry, J. W.; Tiemann, B. G. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 2619.
18. Radeglia, R.; Bahne, S. J. Mol. Struct. 1970, 5, 399.
19. Buncel, E.; Rajagopal, S. J. Org. Chem. 1989, 54, 798.
20. Sen, R.; Majumdar, D.; Bhattacharyya, S. P. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1992, 190, 443.
21. Di Bella, S.; Marks, T. J.; Ratner, M. A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 4440.
22. Maslianitsin, I A.; Shigorin, V. D.; Shipulo, G. P. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1992, 194, 355.
23. Onsager, L. J. Am Chem. Soc. 1936, 58, 1486.
24. Stewart, J. J. P. J Comput. Chem. 1989, 10, 209.
25. Stewart, J. J. P. J. Comput. Chem. 1989, 10, 221.
26. The "Precise" keyword increases the requirement for convergence within the geometry optimization by a factor of 100.
27. Hilderbrandt, R. L. Comput. Chem. 1977, 1, 179.
28. Tsai, C. J.; Jordan, K. D. J. Phys. Chem. 1993, 97, 11227.
29. Klamt, A.; Schuurmann, G. J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 2 1993, 799.
30. AH calculations were performed on a CAChe Worksystem (CAChe Scientific, Beaverton, OR) running version 3.7.
31. Bondi, A. J. Phys. Chem. 1964, 68, 441.
32. Kurtz, H. A.; Stewart, J. J. P.; Dieter, K. M. J. Comput. Chem. 1990, 11, 82.
33. μτ the magnitude of β along the direction of the permanent dipole moment.
34. The values of α calculated for compounds I-V were found to be independent of the computational technique, while those for β varied by as much as 1.9% but had an average difference of only 1.2%.
35. A full list of the optimized bond lengths and bond angles, both in vacuo and in simulated DMSO, is available as supporting information.
36. Singer, K. D.; Sohn, J. E., King, L. A.; Gordon, H. M.; Katz, H. E.; Dirk, C. W. J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 1989, 6, 1339.
37. Böttcher, C. J. F. Theory of Electric Polarization; Elsevier: Amsterdam, 1973.
38. Windholz, M., Ed The Merck Index, 10th ed.; Merck and Co.: Rahway, NJ, 1983.
39. Due to the hygroscopic nature of DMSO the value of ∈, measured at 25°C, depends on the concentration of contaminating water. The value of ∈ = 45 was obtained from ref 32, while ref 10 reports a value of 46.5.