Variability of conductance in molecular junctions

Journal of Physical Chemistry B

Volumn 110, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 2462-2466

  Ulrich, Jochen ^a   Esrail, Donna ^a   Pontius, William ^a   Venkataraman, Latha ^a   Millar, David ^b   Doerrer, Linda H ^b  

^a Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences   (United States)

^b Program on US Russia Relations at Columbia s Harriman Institute   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALCOHOLS; ELECTRIC CONDUCTANCE; LOW TEMPERATURE EFFECTS; QUANTUM THEORY;

MOLECULAR JUNCTIONS; QUANTUM CONDUCTANCE; THIOLS;

MOLECULAR PHYSICS;

EID: 33644752763     PISSN: 15206106     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/jp056455y     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Aviram, A.; Ratner, M. A. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1974, 29, 277.
2. Dhirani, A.; Lin, P. H.; GuyotSionnest, P.; Zehner, R. W.; Sita, L. R. J. Chem. Phys. 1997, 106, 5249.
3. Tian, W. D.; Datta, S.; Hong, S. H.; Reifenberger, R.; Henderson, J. I.; Kubiak, C. P. J. Chem. Phys. 1998, 109, 2874.
4. Chen, J.; Reed, M. A.; Rawlett, A. M.; Tour, J. M. Science 1999, 286, 1550.
5. Wang, W. Y.; Lee, T.; Reed, M. A. Phys. Rev. B 2003, 68.
6. Salomon, A.; Cahen, D.; Lindsay, S.; Tomfohr, J.; Engelkes, V. B.; Frisbie, C. D. Adv. Mater. 2003, 15, 1881.
7. Selzer, Y.; Cai, L. T.; Cabassi, M. A.; Yao, Y. X.; Tour, J. M.; Mayer, T. S.; Allara, D. L. Nano Lett. 2005, 5, 61.
8. Reed, M. A.; Zhou, C.; Muller, C. J.; Burgin, T. P.; Tour, J. M. Science 1997, 278, 252.
9. Kergueris, C.; Bourgoin, J. P.; Palacin, S.; Esteve, D.; Urbina, C.; Magoga, M.; Joachim, C. Phys. Rev. B 1999, 59, 12505.
10. Porath, D.; Bezryadin, A.; de Vries, S.; Dekker, C. Nature 2000, 403, 635.
11. Cui, X. D.; Primak, A.; Zarate, X.; Tomfohr, J.; Sankey, O. F.; Moore, A. L.; Moore, T. A.; Gust, D.; Harris, G.; Lindsay, S. M. Science 2001, 294, 571.
12. Reichert, J.; Ochs, R.; Beckmann, D.; Weber, H. B.; Mayor, M.; von Lohneysen, H. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2002, 88, 176804.
13. Xu, B. Q.; Tao, N. J. J. Science 2003, 301, 1221.
14. Xiao, X. Y.; Xu, B. Q.; Tao, N. J. Nano Lett. 2004, 4, 267.
15. Kaun, C. C.; Guo, H. Nano Lett. 2003, 3, 1521.
16. Ghosh, A. W.; Datta, S. J. Comput. Electron. 2002, 1, 515.
17. Tikhonov, A.; Coalson, R. D.; Dahnovsky, Y. J. Chem. Phys. 2002, 117, 567.
18. Emberly, E. G.; Kirczenow, G. Phys. Rev. B 1998, 58, 10911.
19. Based on the multimode lead calculation in ref 18. The difference between (100) and (111) electrodes can be large as four orders of magnitude, when based on the one-band ideal leads.
20. Stokbro, K.; Taylor, J.; Brandbyge, M.; Mozos, J. L.; Ordejon, P. Comput. Mater. Sci. 2003, 27, 151.
21. Di Ventra, M.; Pantelides, S. T.; Lang, N. D. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2000, 84, 979.
22. Bratkovsky, A. M.; Kornilovitch, P. E. Phys. Rev. B 2003, 67, 115307.
23. Hall, L. E.; Reimers, J. R.; Hush, N. S.; Silverbrook, K. J. Chem. Phys. 2000, 112, 1510.
24. Basch, H.; Cohen, R.; Ratner, M. A. Nano Lett. 2005, 5, 1668.
25. He, J.; Sankey, O.; Lee, M.; Tao, N.; Li, X.; Lindsay, S. Faraday Discuss. 2006, 131, 145.
26. van Ruitenbeek, J. M.; Alvarez, A.; Pineyro, I.; Grahmann, C.; Joyez, P.; Devoret, M. H.; Esteve, D.; Urbina, C. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 1996, 67, 108.
27. In our MCBJ setup, we push the two Au electrodes, which are coated with molecules, together to form a contact of conductance greater than GO prior to breaking the junctions so as to produce the STM-like measurements.
28. Ohnishi, H.; Kondo, Y.; Takayanagi, K. Nature 1998, 395, 780.
29. We fit only the curves that do not drop below our detection limit after the contact breaks. This represents about 75% of curves without molecules (20% in MCBJ experiments) and about 95% of curves with molecules in solution (50% in MCBJ experiments).
30. We note here that for a quantitative comparison of histograms, it is important to collect data in equimolar solutions of different molecules.
31. Allen, F. H.; Motherwell, W. D. S. Acta Crystallogr., Sect. B 2002, 58, 407.
32. Although this cutoff is arbitrary, it was chosen to keep ∼15% of the data. Varying this cutoff between 0.25 and 0.5 does not qualitatively affect the histograms.
33. 0, in agreement with ref 14.