Electrostatic properties of ideal and non-ideal polar organic monolayers: Implications for electronic devices

Advanced Materials

Volumn 19, Issue 23, 2007, Pages 4103-4117

  Natan, Amir ^a   Kronik, Leeor ^a   Haick, Hossam ^b   Tung, Raymond T ^c  

^a WEIZMANN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE   (Israel)

^b TECHNION ISRAEL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Israel)

^c CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ELECTRIC PROPERTIES; ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT; ELECTROSTATICS; SIZE DETERMINATION;

CHEMICAL SENSING; DIPOLE MODIFICATION; ELECTROSTATIC PROPERTIES; POLAR ORGANIC MONOLAYERS;

MONOLAYERS;

EID: 37149008098     PISSN: 09359648     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/adma.200701681     Document Type: Article

References (115)

1. Molecular Electronics: Science and Technology (Eds: A. Aviram, M. Ratner), New York Academy of Sciences, New York 1999.
2. J. R. Heath, M. A. Ratner, Physics Today 2003, 56, 43.
3. Introducing Molecular Electronics (Eds: G. Cuniberti, G. Fagas, K. Richter), Springer, Berlin 2005.
4. G. Ashkenasy, D. Cahen, R. Cohen, A. Shanzer, A. Vilan, Acc. Chem. Res. 2002, 35, 121.
5. A. Vilan, D. Cahen, Trends Biotechnol. 2002, 20, 22.
6. B. O'Reagan, M. Grätzel, Nature 1991, 353, 737.
7. J. J. Wei, C. Schafmeister, G. Bird, A. Paul, R. Naaman, D. H. Waldeck, J. Phys. Chem. B 2006, 110, 1301.
8. a) Z. Vager, R. Naaman. Chem. Phys. 2002, 281, 305.
9. b) I. Carmeli, V. Skakalova, R. Naaman, Z. Vager, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2002, 41, 761.
10. P. Crespo, R. Litrán, T. C. Rojas, M. Multigner, J. M. de la Fuente, J. C. Sánchez-López, M. A. García, A. Hernando, S. Penadés, A. Fernández, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2004, 93, 087204.
11. L. Kronik, Y. Shapira, Surf. Sci. Rep. 1999, 37, 1, Sections 2.1.4, 2.1.5, and 5.2.
12. B. D. Campbell, H. E. Farnsworth, Surf. Sci. 1968, 10, 197.
13. A. Franciosi, C. G. Van de Walle, Surf. Sci. Rep. 1996, 25, 1.
14. a) T. dell'Orto, J. Almeida, C. Coluzza, A. Baldereschi, G. Margaritondo, M. Cantile, S. Yildirim, L. Sorba, A. Franciosi, Appl. Phys. Lett. 1994, 64, 2111.
15. b) M. Marsi, R. Houdre, A. Rudra, M. Ilegems, F. Gozzo, C. Coluzza, G. Margaritondo, Phys. Rev. B 1993, 47, 6455.
16. a) R. Cohen, L. Kronik, A. Shanzer, D. Cahen, A. Liu, Y. Rosenwaks, J. K. Lorenz, A. B. Ellis, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1999, 121, 10545.
17. b) R. Cohen, L. Kronik, A. Vilan, A. Shanzer, Y. Rosenwaks, D. Cahen, Adv. Mater. 2000, 12, 33.
18. I. Higuchi, T. Ree, H. Eyring, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1955, 77, 4969.
19. D. G. Wu, G. Ashkenasy, D. Shvarts, R. V. Ussyshkin, R. Naaman, A. Shanzer, D. Cahen, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2000, 39, 4496.
20. D. Cahen, R. Naaman, Z. Vager, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2005, 15, 1571.
21. T. He, J. He, M. Lu, B. Chen, H. Pang, W. F. Reus, W. M. Nolte, D. P. Nackashi, P. D. Franzon, J. M. Tour, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 14537.
22. H. Haick, M. Ambrico, T. Ligonzo, R. T. Tung, D. Cahen, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 6854.
23. See, e.g., a) G. P. Srivastava, Theoretical Modeling of Semiconductor Surfaces: Microscopic Studies of Electrons and Phonons, World Scientific, Singapore 1999.
24. b) G. P. Srivastava, Rep. Prog. Phys. 1997, 60, 561.
25. See, e.g., J. D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, 2nd ed., Wiley, New York 1975.
26. J. R. MacDonald, C. A. Barlow, Jr., J. Chem. Phys. 1963, 39, 412.
27. J. Topping, Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A 1927, 114, 67.
28. a) O. Gershevitz, C. N. Sukenik, J. Ghabboun. D. Cahen, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 4730.
29. b) O. Gershewitz, M. Grinstein, C. N. Sukenik, K. Regev, J. Ghabboun, D. Cahen, J. Phys. Chem. B 2004, 108, 664.
30. H. Fukagawa, H. Yamane, S. Kera, K. K. Okudaira, N. Ueno, Phys. Rev. B 2006, 73, 041302.
31. A. Natan, Y. Zidon, Y. Shapira, L. Kronik, Phys. Rev. B 2006, 73, 193310.
32. V. De Renzi, R. Rousseau, D. Marchetto, R. Biagi, S. Scandolo, U. del Pennino, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2005, 95, 046804.
33. D. Cornil, Y. Olivier, V. Geskin, J. Cornil, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2007, 17, 1143.
34. G. Heimel, L. Romaner, E. Zojer, J.-L. Brédas, Nano Lett. 2007, 7, 932.
35. V. Perebeinos, M. Newton, Chem. Phys. 2005, 319, 159.
36. L. Segev, A. Salomon, A. Natan, D. Cahen, L. Kronik, F. Amy, C. K. Chan, A. Kahn, Phys. Rev. B 2006, 74, 165323.
37. M. L. Sushko, A. L. Shluger, J. Phys. Chem. B 2007, 111, 4019.
38. J. E. Lennard-Jones, M. Dent, Trans. Faraday Soc. 1928, 24, 92.
39. In Equations 7 and 9 the potential is expressed using complex notation for convenience. However, the result is necessarily real because the contributions from the m,n and -m-n terms in the summation are so that the imaginary part is zero.
40. 2d is taken to zero when d tends to zero. This is not a valid limit for an arbitrary m,n pair as these Fourier indices can be arbitrarily large. However, because of the exponential decay in z, one can always find an m,n pair of values such that all potential terms above it are arbitrarily small. Therefore, the limit needs to be taken in practice only for finite values of m,n and is therefore correct.
41. See, e.g., F. J. Zucker, Robert E. Collin, Antenna Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York 1969.
42. D. Deutsch, A. Natan, Y. Shapira, L. Kronik, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 2989.
43. Note that details of the electrostatic potential near the nuclei differ in parts (a) and (b) of Figure 3. This is merely a consequence of whether the electrostatic potential is computed directly (as in b) or derived from the computed dipole (as in a). This difference is a technical consequence of the use of pseudopotentials and bears no physical significance for the present discussion. For elaboration, see Section 4 of ref. [39].
44. A. Natan, L. Kronik, Y. Shapira, Appl. Surf. Sci. 2006, 252, 7608.
45. G. Heimel, L. Romaner, J.-L. Brédas, E. Zojer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2006, 96, 196806.
46. G. Heimel, L. Romaner, J.-L. Brédas, E. Zojer, Surf. Sci. 2006, 600, 4548.
47. N. K. Adam, J. F. Danielli, J. B. Harding, Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A 1934, 147, 491.
48. a) P. C. Rusu, G. Brocks, J. Phys. Chem. B 2006, 110, 22628.
49. b) P. C. Rusu, G. Brocks, Phys. Rev. B 2006, 74, 073414.
50. M. L. Sushko, A. L. Shluger, unpublished.
51. D. M. Taylor, G. F. Bayes, Phys. Rev. E 1994, 49, 1439.
52. J. Demchak, T. Fort, Jr., J. Colloid Interface Sci. 1974, 46, 191.
53. P. Dynarowicz-Latka, A. Cavalli, D. A. S. Filho, P. Milart, M. C. dos Santos, O. N. Oliveira, Chem. Phys. Lett. 2001, 337, 11.
54. M. Iwamoto, Y. Mizutani, A. Sugimura, Phys. Rev B 1996, 54, 8186.
55. a) S. D. Evans, A. Ulman, Chem. Phys. Lett. 1990, 170, 462.
56. b) S. D. Evans, E. Urankar, A. Ulman, N. Ferris, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991, 113, 4121.
57. M. Bruening, R. Cohen, J.-F. Guillemoles, T. Moav, J. Libman, A. Shanzer, D. Cahen, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1997, 119, 5720.
58. M. Bruening, E. Moons, D. Yaron-Marcovich, D. Cahen, J. Libman, A. Shanzer, D. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 2972.
59. M. Bruening, E. Moons, D. Cahen, A. Shanzer, J. Phys. Chem. 1995, 99, 8368.
60. S. Bastide, R. Butruille, D. Cahen, A. Dutta, J. Libman, A. Shanzer, L. Sun, A. Vilan, J. Phys. Chem. 1997, 101, 2678.
61. R. Cohen, N. Zenou, D. Cahen, S. Yitzchaik, Chem. Phys. Lett. 1997, 279, 270.
62. A. Salomon, D. Berkovich, D. Cahen, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2003, 82, 1051.
63. J. Kruger, U Bach, M. Grätzel, Adv. Mater. 2000, 12, 447.
64. a) L. Zuppiroli, L. Si-Ahmed, K. Kamaras, F. Nüsch, M. N. Bussac, D. Ades, A. Siove, E. Moons, M. Grätzel, Europhys. J. B 1999, 11, 505.
65. b) F. Nüsch, F. Rotzinger, L. Si-Ahmed, L. Zuppiroli, Chem. Phys. Lett. 1998, 288, 861.
66. c) C. Ganzorig. K.-J. Kwak, K. Yagi, M. Fujihira, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2001, 79, 272
67. a) Y. Ofir, N. Zenou, I. Goykhman, S. Yitzchaik, J. Phys. Chem. B 2006, 110, 8002.
68. b) R. Sfez, N. Peor, S. R. Cohen, H. Cohen, S. Yitzchaik, J. Mater. Chem. 2006, 16, 4044.
69. By definition, the dipole moment is a vector oriented from the negative to the positive pole. Here, we define a dipole as negative if its negative pole is closer to the semiconductor surface and positive if the negative pole. Note that sometimes the opposite definition is adopted.
70. a) I. H. Campbell, J. D. Kress, R. L. Martin, D. L. Smith, Appl. Phys. Lett. 1997, 71, 3528.
71. b) I. H. Campbell, S. Rubin, T. A. Zawodzinski, J. D. Kress. R. L. Martin, D. L. Smith, N. N. Barashkov, J. P. Ferraris, Phys. Rev. B 1996, 54, R14321.
72. A. Vilan, A. Shanzer. D. Cahen, Nature 2000, 404, 166.
73. A. Vilan, J. Ghabboun. D. Cahen, J. Phys. Chem. B 2003, 107, 6360.
74. H. Haick, M. Ambrico, T. Ligonzo, D. Cahen, Adv. Mater. 2004, 16, 2145.
75. Y Selzer, D. Cahen, Adv. Mater. 2001, 13, 508.
76. H. Asanuma, E. M. Bishop, H.-Z. Yu, Electrochim. Acta 2007, 52, 2913.
77. H. Ishii, H. Sugiyama, E. Ito, K. Seki, Adv. Mater. 1999, 11, 605.
78. X. Crispin, V. Geskin, A. Crispin, J. Cornil, R. Lazzaroni, W. R. Salaneck, J.-L. Bredas, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 8131.
79. H. Haick. J. Ghabboun. D. Cahen, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2005, 86, 042113/1.
80. H. Haick, J. Ghabboun, O. Niitsoo, H. Cohen, D. Cahen, A. Vilan, J. Hwang, A. Wan, F. Amy, A. Kahn, J. Phys. Chem. B 2005, 109, 9622.
81. H. Haick, M. Ambrico, J. Ghabboun, T. Ligonzo, D. Cahen, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2004, 6, 4538.
82. S. Kobayashi, T. Nishikawa, T. Takenobu, S. Mori, T. Shimoda, T. Mitani, H. Shimotani, N. Yoshimoto, S. Ogawa, Y. Iwasa, Nat. Mater. 2004, 3, 317.
83. See, e.g., A. Ulman, An Introduction to Ultrathin Organic Films, Academic, San Diego 1991.
84. A quantitative analysis would require that Equations 3 and 4 be written for each dipole separately. The electric field and dipole become position-dependent and a set of coupled equations need to be solved self-consistently. Such analysis is not pursued here.
85. A. Vilan, J. Ghabboun, D. Cahen, J. Phys. Chem. B 2003, 107, 6360.
86. H. Haick. J. P. Pelz, T. Ligonzo, M. Ambrico, D. Cahen, W. Cai, C. Marginean, C. Tivarus, R. T. Tung, Phys. Status Solidi A 2006, 203, 3438.
87. 3-terminated dicarboxylic acid)/n-GaAs one discussed here, produce two main types of contacts: (a) direct metal-semiconductor contacts in the pinhole domains, and (b) metal-molecule-semiconductor contacts.
88. See. e.g., A. Salomon, D. Cahen, S. Lindsay, J. Tomfohr, V. B. Engelkes. C. D. Frisbie, Adv. Mater. 2003, 15, 1881.
89. R. C. Rossi, M. X. Tan, N. S. Lewis, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2000, 77, 2698.
90. R. C. Rossi. N. S. Lewis,J. Phys. Chem. B 2001, 105, 12303.
91. The term "pinch-off" describes the modulation of electric potential profiles under the low barrier height interface regions, as a result of nm-scale spatial inhomogeneities in the barrier height of the metal/ semiconductor contacts.
92. a) R. T. Tung, Phys. Rev. B 1992, 45, 13509.
93. b) R. T. Tung, Mater. Sci. Eng. R. 2001, 35, 1.
94. P. Bergveld, Sens. Actuators B 2003, 88,1.
95. M. J. Scheming, Sensors 2005, 5,126.
96. K. J. Albert, N. S. Lewis, C. L. Schauer, G. A. Sotzing, S. E. Stitzel, T. P. Vaid, D. R. Walt. Chem. Rev. 2000, 100, 2595.
97. L. Chai, D. Cahen, Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2002, 19, 339.
98. D. G. Wu, D. Cahen, P. Graf, R. Naaman. A. Nitzan, D. Shvarts, Chem. Eur. J. 2001, 7, 1743.
99. M. Rei Vilar, J. El-Beghdadi. F. Debontridder. R. Naaman. A. Arbel, A. M. Ferraria, A. M. Botelho Do Rego. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2006, 26, 253.
100. J. Song, W. Lu. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2006, 89, 223503.
101. Y. Rudich, I. Benjamin, R. Naaman, E. Thomas, S. Trakhtenberg, R. Ussyshkin, J. Phys. Chem. A 2000, 104, 5238.
102. R. Hoffman, Solids and Surfaces: A Chemist's View of Bonding in Extended Structures, VCH, New York 1988.
103. See, e.g., A. V. Oppenheim, A. S. Willsky, Signals and Systems, Prentice-Hall, London 1983.
104. J. Hahm, C. M. Lieber, Nano Lett. 2004, 4, 51.
105. F. Patolsky, G. F. Zheng. O. Hayden, M. Lakadamyali, X. W. Zhuang, C. M. Lieber, Proc. Natl. Acad. S0ci. USA 2004, 101, 14017.
106. Z. Li, Y. Chen, X. Li, T. I. Kamins. K. Nauka, R. S. Williams, Nano Lett. 2004, 4, 245.
107. M. Curreli, C. Li, Y. Sun, B. Lei, M. A. Gundersen. M. E. Thompson, C. Zhou. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 6922.
108. A. Star, J.-C. P. Gabriel, K. Bradley. G. Grüner, Nano Lett. 2003, 3, 459.
109. A. Star, E. Tu. J. Niemann, J.-C. P. Gabriel. C. S. Joiner. C. Valcke, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2006, 103, 921.
110. R. J. Chen, S. Bangsaruntip, K. A. Drouvalakis. N. Wong Shi Kam, M. Shim, Y. Li, W. Kim, P. J. Utz. H. Dai. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2003, 100, 4984.
111. The above discussion referred only to dipoles adsorbed on the sides of the nano-wire or nano-tube. Dipoles at the edge, i.e., between the nano-tube or nano-wire and, e.g.. a metal contact are not considered here. Note, however, that because of the reduced dimensionality at such junctions their behavior is different from that of ordinary Schottky barriers. See, e.g., a) F. Leonard. J. Tersoff, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2000, 84, 4693.
112. b) S. Heinze, M. Radosavljevic, J. Tersoff. P. Avouris, Phys. Rev. B 2003, 68, 235418.
113. a) W. Kohn. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1996, 76, 3168.
114. b) E. Prodan, W. Kohn, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2005, 102, 11635.
115. V. S. L'vov, R. Naaman, V. Tiberkevich, Z. Vager, Chem. Phys. Lett. 2003, 381, 650.