Investigation of the charge transport through disordered organic molecular heterojunctions

Journal of Applied Physics

Volumn 100, Issue 3, 2006, Pages

  Houili, H ^a   Tutis E ^b   Batistic I ^c   Zuppiroli, L ^a  

^a EPFL   (Switzerland)

^b INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS   (Croatia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB   (Croatia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHARGE TRANSFER; COMPUTER SIMULATION; ELECTRIC FIELD EFFECTS; MOLECULAR STRUCTURE; MONTE CARLO METHODS; THIN FILMS;

BILAYER HOMOPOLAR SYSTEM; COULOMB INTERACTION; MASTER EQUATION (ME) CALCULATION; ORGANIC MOLECULAR HETEROJUNCTIONS; ORGANIC MOLECULAR MEDIA;

HETEROJUNCTIONS;

EID: 33747337473     PISSN: 00218979     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.2222041     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. S. R. Forrest, Nature (London) 428, 911 (2004);
2. D. Berner, H. Houili, W. Leo, and L. Zuppiroli, Phys. Status Solidi A 202, 9 (2005).
3. C. W. Tang and S. A. Van Slyke, Appl. Phys. Lett. 51, 913 (1987).
4. S. A. Van Slyke, C. H. Chen, and C. W. Tang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 69, 2160 (1996).
5. G. Vamvounis, H. Aziz, N.-X. Hu, and Z. D. Popovic, Synth. Met. 143, 69 (2004).
6. E. Tutiš, D. Berner, and L. Zuppiroli, J. Appl. Phys. 93, 4594 (2003).
7. J. Staudigel, M. Stossel, F. Steuber, and J. Simmerer, J. Appl. Phys. 86, 3895 (1999).
8. E. Tutiš, M. N. Bussac, B. Masenelli, M. Carrard, and L. Zuppiroli, J. Appl. Phys. 89, 430 (2001).
9. H. Houili, E. Tutiš, H. Lütjens, M. N. Bussac, and L. Zuppiroli, Comput. Phys. Commun. 156, 108 (2003).
10. Y. N. Gartstein and E. M. Conwell, Chem. Phys. Lett. 255, 93 (1996).
11. U. Wolf, V. I. Arkhipov, and H. Bässler, Phys. Rev. B 59, 7507 (1999).
12. H. Bässler, Phys. Status Solidi B 175, 15 (1993).
13. E. M. Conwell and M. W. Wu, Appl. Phys. Lett. 70, 1867 (1997).
14. Y. N. Gartstein and E. M. Conwell, Chem. Phys. Lett. 245, 351 (1995).
15. J. Nelson, Phys. Rev. B 67, 155209 (2003).
16. J. A. Anta, J. Nelson, and N. Quirke, Phys. Rev. B 65, 125324 (2002).
17. A. J. Chatten, S. M. Tuladhar, S. A. Choulis, D. D. D. C. Bradley, and J. Nelson, J. Mater. Sci. 40, 1393 (2005).
18. N. C. Greenham and P. A. Bobbert, Phys. Rev. B 68, 245301 (2003).
19. T. Offermans, S. C. J. Meskers, and R. A. J. Janssen, Chem. Phys. 308, 125 (2005).
20. B. Sapoval and C. Hermann, Physics of Semiconductors (Springer, New York, 1995).
21. S. V. Rakhmanova and E. M. Conwell, Appl. Phys. Lett. 76, 3822 (2000).
22. S. G. Brush, H. L. Sahlin, and E. Teller, J. Chem. Phys. 45, 2102 (1966).
23. D. Emin, Phys. Rev. B 46, 9419 (1992);
24. D. Emin, Phys. Rev. B 48, 13691 (1993).
25. D. Emin, Adv. Phys. 24, 305 (1975).
26. L. Zuppiroli, M. N. Bussac, S. Paschen, O. Chauvet, and L. Forro, Phys. Rev. B 50, 5196 (1994).
27. A. Ferretti, A. Ruini, G. Bussi, E. Molinari, and M. J. Caldas, Phys. Rev. B 69, 205205 (2004).
28. A. Curioni, M. Boero, and W. Andreoni, Chem. Phys. Lett. 294, 263 (1998).
29. L. Zuppiroli, A. Bieber, D. Michoud, G. Galli, F. Gygi, M. N. Bussac, and J. J. André, Chem. Phys. Lett. 374, 7 (2003).
30. D. Emin, in Handbook of Conducting Polymers, edited by T. A. Skolheim (Dekker, New York, 1986), Vol. 2, p. 915.
31. A. Miller and E. Abrahams, Phys. Rev. 120, 745 (1960).
32. V. I. Arkhipov, E. V. Emelianova, and H. Bässler, J. Appl. Phys. 90, 2352 (2001).
33. S. V. Novikov, D. H. Dunlap, V. M. Kenkre, P. E. Parris, and A. V. Vannikov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 4472 (1998).
34. J. C. Scott and G. G Malliaras, Chem. Phys. Lett. 299, 115 (1999).
35. Z. G. Yu, D. L. Smith, A. Saxena, R. L. Martin, and A. R. Bishop, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 721 (2000);
36. Phys. Rev. B 63, 085202 (2001).
37. W. F. Pasveer, J. Cottaar, C. Tanase, R. Coehoorn, P. A. Bobbert, P. W. M. Blom, D. M. de Leeuw, and M. A. J. Michels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 206601 (2005).
38. E. Tutiš, I. Batistić, and D. Berner, Phys. Rev. B 70, 161202 (2004).
39. T. van Woudenbergh, J. Wildeman, and P. W. M. Blom, Phys. Rev. B 71, 205216 (2005).
40. BT]}, where 2 comes from the number of spin projections. It may be easily checked that for a given concentration of particles the two approaches (with and without spin) to the hard-ball interaction give the same distribution. The factor 1/2 in the second approach is compensated for by the difference in the chemical potential with respect to the spinless approach.
41. G. G. Malliaras, Y. Shen, D. H. Dunlap, H. Murata, and Z. Kafafi, Appl. Phys. Lett. 79, 2582 (2001).
42. D. Berner (private communication).
43. -1. This equation is derived in the same manner as the one for Δ>Fqa.
44. O. Schenk and K. Gaeitner, FGCS, Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 20(3), 475 (2004);
45. O. Schenk, K. Gaertner, and W. Fichtner, BIT 40(1), 158 (2000);
46. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. (USA) 20(1), 359 (1998).