Using a chemical concept for reactivity for the interpretation of STM images of physisorbed molecules

Applied Surface Science

Volumn 253, Issue 23, 2007, Pages 9047-9053

  Gawronski, Heiko ^a   Henzl, Jörg ^a   Simic Milosevic, Violeta ^b   Morgenstern, Karina ^a  

^a LEIBNIZ UNIVERSITY HANNOVER   (Germany)

^b FREIE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Electrostatic potential mapped electron density; STM imaging of molecules

Indexed keywords

CARRIER CONCENTRATION; MOLECULAR ORBITALS; PERMITTIVITY; PHYSISORPTION; SCANNING TUNNELING MICROSCOPY; TRANSITION METALS;

CHLORONITROBENZENE; DIELECTRICITY CONSTANT; ELECTROSTATIC POTENTIAL; ELECTROSTATIC POTENTIAL MAPPED ELECTRON DENSITY;

MOLECULAR DYNAMICS;

EID: 34548304899     PISSN: 01694332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2007.04.038     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Binnig G., Rohrer H., Gerber Ch., and Weibel E. Appl. Phys. Lett. 40 (1982) 178
2. Binnig G., Rohrer H., Gerber Ch., and Weibel E. Phys. Rev. Lett. 49 (1982) 57
3. Sautet Ph. Chem. Rev. 97 (1997) 1097
4. Bardeen J. Phys. Rev. Lett. 6 (1961) 57
5. Tersoff J., and Hamann D.R. Phys. Rev. B 31 (1985) 805
6. Todorov T.N., Briggs G.A.D., and Sutton A.P. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 5 (1993) 2389
7. Pendry J.B., Pretre A.B., and Krutzen B.C.H. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 3 (1991) 4313
8. Messerli S., Schintke S., Morgenstern K., Nieminen J., and Schneider W.-D. Chem. Phys. Lett. 328 (2000) 330
9. Schintke S., Messerli S., Morgenstern K., Nieminen J., and Schneider W.-D. J. Chem. Phys. 114 (2001) 4206
10. Nieminen J., Lahti S., Paavilainen S., and Morgenstern K. Phys. Rev. B 66 (2002) 165421
11. Morgenstern K., and Nieminen J. Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 066102
12. Morgenstern K., and Nieminen J. J. Chem. Phys. 120 (2004) 10786
13. Nieminen J., Niemi E., Simic-Milosevic V., and Morgenstern K. Phys. Rev. B 72 (2005) 195421
14. Weiss P.S., and Eigler D.M. Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 (1993) 3139
15. Niemi E., and Nieminen J. Chem. Phys. Lett. 397 (2004) 200
16. Hallmark V.M., Chiang S., Meinhardt K.-P., and Hafner K. Phys. Rev. Lett. 70 (1993) 3740
17. Lippel P.H., Wilson R.J., Miller M.D., Wöll Ch., and Chiang S. Phys. Rev. Lett. 62 (1989) 171
18. Böhringer M., Morgenstern K., Schneider W.-D., Berndt R., Mauri F., De Vita A., and Car R. Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 324. We used this method to determine the pro-chirality of molecules within a cluster.
19. Ho W. J. Chem. Phys. 117 (2002) 11033
20. Bamzai A.S., and Deb B.M. Rev. Mod. Phys. 53 (1981) 95
21. Deb B.M. Resonance 2 (1997) 66
22. Henzl J., Mehlhorn M., Gawronski H., Rieder K.-H., and Morgenstern K. Angew. Chem. Int. 45 (2006) 603
23. Simic-Milosevic V., Mehlhorn M., Rieder K.H., Meyer J., and Morgenstern K. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 (2007) 116102
24. Henzl J., Bredow Th., and Morgenstern K. Chem. Phys. Lett. 435 (2007) 278
25. Mehlhorn M., Gawronski H., Nedelmann L., Grujic A., and Morgenstern K. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 78 (2007) 033905
26. ArgusLab 4.0.1, Mark A. Thompson, Planaria Software LLC, Seattle, WA, http://www.arguslab.com.
27. Rappé A.K., Casewit C.J., Colwell K.S., Goddard III W.A., and Skiff W.M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 114 (1992) 10024
28. Dewar M.J.S., Zoebisch E.G., Healy E.F., and Stewart J.J.P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 107 (1985) 3902
29. Stewart J.J.P. J. Comput. Chem. 10 (1989) 209
30. Stewart J.J.P. J. Comput. Chem. 10 (1989) 221
31. For example, the chlorine-chlorine distance in meta-dichlorobenzene is 0.5540 nm with UFF, 0.5362 nm with AM1, and, 0.5359 nm with PM3. The difference between the two latter Hamiltonians is thus of the order of one pm, order of magnitudes below the lateral resolution of any STM., The values for para-dichlorobenzene are 0.6397 nm for UFF, 0.6190 nm for AM1, and 0.6178 nm for PM3.
32. For both molecules and on all three surfaces, some of the molecules fragment upon adsorption, and the majority clusters into islands at the deposition temperature of 17 K.
33. Niemi E., Simic-Milosevic V., Morgenstern K., Korventausta A., Paavilainen S., and Nieminen J. J. Chem. Phys. 125 (2006) 184708
34. Ikeda T., and Tsutsumi O. Science 268 (1995) 1873
35. Tamai N., and Miyasaka H. Chem. Rev. 100 (2000) 1875
36. Kirakosian A., Comstock M.J., Cho J., and Crommie M.F. Phys. Rev. B 71 (2005) 113409
37. Miwa J.A., Weigelt S., Gersen H., Besenbacher F., Rosei F., and Lideroth T.R. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128 (2006) 3164
38. Choi B.-Y., Kahng S.-J., Kim S., Kim H., Kim H.W., Song Y.J., Ihm J., and Kuk Y. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006) 156106
39. As the Hamiltonians do not facilitate calculation of Na, we replace this atom by a hydrogen atom in the calculation. As this carries no negative potential, it should be fairly transparent in the STM image. The same is expected for the likewise electropositive Na.
40. Wu S.W., Nazin G.V., Chen X., Qiu X.H., and Ho W. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 236802
41. Repp J., Meyer F., Stojkovic S., Gourdon A., and Joachim Ch. Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 (2005) 026803
42. Repp J., Meyer G., Paavilanen S., Olsson F.E., and Persson M. Science 312 (2006) 1196
43. Böhringer M., Morgenstern K., Schneider W.-D., and Berndt R. Surf. Sci. 457 (2000) 37