Raman scattering in current-carrying molecular junctions

Journal of Chemical Physics

Volumn 130, Issue 14, 2009, Pages

  Galperin, Michael ^a   Ratner, Mark A ^b   Nitzan, Abraham ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIASED JUNCTIONS; CHARGE-TRANSFER; GENERALIZED SCATTERINGS; GROUND ELECTRONIC STATE; INTERFERENCE COMPONENTS; INVERSE PROCESS; ISOLATED MOLECULES; JUNCTION SPECTROSCOPIES; METAL SURFACES; MOLECULAR JUNCTIONS; MOLECULAR STATE; NON EQUILIBRIUMS; NON-EQUILIBRIUM GREEN'S FUNCTIONS; SCATTERING SIGNALS; SURFACE ENHANCED RAMAN SCATTERINGS; VOLTAGE BIAS;

DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS; ELECTRODES; GREEN'S FUNCTION; MACHINERY; RAMAN SCATTERING; REFRACTION;

SCATTERING;

EID: 65249134007     PISSN: 00219606     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.3109900     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. K. Kneipp, M. Moskovits, and H. Kneipp, Topics in Applied Physics (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2006), Vol. 103.
2. L. F. Cohen, Faraday Discussions (RSC, Cambridge, UK, 2006), Vol. 132.
3. J. Gersten and A. Nitzan, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.440560 73, 3023 (1980).
4. J. I. Gersten, R. L. Birke, and J. R. Lombardi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.43.147 43, 147 (1979).
5. E. Burstein, Y. J. Chen, C. Y. Chen, S. Lundquist, and E. Tosatti, Solid State Commun. 0038-1098 10.1016/0038-1098(79)90665-3 29, 567 (1979).
6. B. N. J. Persson, Chem. Phys. Lett. 0009-2614 10.1016/0009-2614(81)85441- 3 82, 561 (1981).
7. K. A. Willets and R. P. Van Duyne, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 0066-426X 10.1146/annurev.physchem.58.032806.104607 58, 267 (2007).
8. A. Otto, I. Mrozek, H. Grabhorn, and W. Akemann, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 0953-8984 10.1088/0953-8984/4/5/001 4, 1143 (1992).
9. J. R. Lombardi, R. L. Birke, T. Lu, and J. Xu, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.450037 84, 4174 (1986).
10. J. R. Lombardi and R. L. Birke, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.2748386 126, 244709 (2007).
11. J. R. Lombardi and R. L. Birke, J. Phys. Chem. C 1932-7447 10.1021/jp800167v 112, 5605 (2008).
12. A. C. Albrecht, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.1701032 34, 1476 (1961).
13. S. Nie and S. R. Emory, Science 0036-8075 10.1126/science.275.5303.1102 275, 1102 (1997).
14. K. Kneipp, Y. Wang, H. Kneipp, L. T. Perelman, I. Itzkan, R. R. Dasari, and M. S. Feld, Phys. Rev. Lett. 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.78.1667 78, 1667 (1997).
15. J. Jiang, K. Bosnick, M. Maillard, and L. Brus, J. Phys. Chem. B 1089-5647 10.1021/jp034632u 107, 9964 (2003).
16. P. K. Aravind, A. Nitzan, and H. Metiu, Surf. Sci. 0039-6028 10.1016/0039-6028(81)90595-1 110, 189 (1981).
17. M. Inoue and K. J. Ohtaka, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 0031-9015 10.1143/JPSJ.52.3853 52, 3853 (1983).
18. S. R. Emory, R. A. Jensen, T. Wenda, M. Han, and S. Nie, Faraday Discuss. 0301-7249 10.1039/b509223j 132, 249 (2006).
19. D. P. Fromm, A. Sundaramurthy, A. Kinkhabwala, P. J. Schuck, G. S. Kino, and W. E. Moerner, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.2167649 124, 061101 (2006).
20. A. Nitzan and M. Ratner, Science 0036-8075 10.1126/science.1081572 300, 1384 (2003).
21. M. Galperin, M. A. Ratner, A. Nitzan, and A. Troisi, Science 0036-8075 10.1126/science.1146556 319, 1056 (2008).
22. T. Dadosh, Y. Gordin, R. Krahne, I. Khivrich, D. Mahalu, V. Frydman, J. Sperling, A. Yacoby, and I. Bar-Joseph, Nature (London) 0028-0836 10.1038/nature03898 436, 677 (2005).
23. A. Otto and J. Indian, Physica B 0921-4526 77, 63 (2003).
24. J.-H. Tian, B. Liu, X. Li, Z.-L. Yang, B. Ren, S.-T. Wu, N. Tao, and Z.-Q. Tian, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 0002-7863 10.1021/ja0648615 128, 14748 (2006).
25. D. R. Ward, N. K. Grady, C. S. Levin, N. J. Halas, Y. Wu, P. Nordlander, and D. Natelson, Nano Lett. 1530-6984 10.1021/nl070625w 7, 1396 (2007).
26. D. R. Ward, N. J. Halas, J. W. Ciszek, J. M. Tour, Y. Wu, P. Nordlander, and D. Natelson, Nano Lett. 1530-6984 10.1021/nl073346h 8, 919 (2008).
27. M. Galperin and A. Nitzan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.206802 95, 206802 (2005).
28. M. Galperin and A. Nitzan, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.2204917 124, 234709 (2006).
29. Lombardi and co-workers have invoked the Herzberg-Teller intensity borrowing concept as used by Tang and Albrecht in their calculation of the contribution of the charge-transfer mechanism to SERS. In the analysis here, based on Eq., this is unnecessary. This concept was introduced in order to explain the appearance of molecular spectral features that are forbidden by symmetry in the Born-Oppenheimer (BO) approximation. However, the zero-order description of the molecule-metal system is not done in the adiabatic BO, but on the "diabatic" level in which the BO picture is applied to the uncoupled molecule and metal systems, leaving their electronic coupling as a perturbative correction in the Hamiltonian. In this representation there is no need to invoke intensity borrowing in a discussion of photon induced charge-transfer transitions between metal(s) and molecule. The actual coupling needs of course to be estimated, and in the present work, we have based our estimate on a model proposed by Persson (Ref.) as discussed at the end of Sec..
30. G. D. Mahan, Many-Particle Physics (Plenum, New York, 2000).
31. T. Holstein, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 0003-4916 10.1016/0003-4916(59)90002-8 8, 325 (1959).
32. I. G. Lang and Y. A. Firsov, Sov. Phys. JETP 0038-5646 16, 1301 (1963).
33. M. Galperin, A. Nitzan, and M. A. Ratner, Phys. Rev. B 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.73.045314 73, 045314 (2006).
34. Y. Meir and N. S. Wingreen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.68.2512 68, 2512 (1992).
35. H. Haug and A. -P. Jauho, Quantum Kinetics in Transport and Optics of Semiconductors (Springer, Berlin, 1996).
36. M. Galperin, M. Ratner, and A. Nitzan, Phys. Rev. B 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.75.155312 75, 155312 (2007).
37. J. -S. Wang, J. Wang, and N. Zeng, Phys. Rev. B 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.74.033408 74, 033408 (2006).
38. J. -S. Wang, N. Zeng, J. Wang, and C. K. Gan, Phys. Rev. E 1063-651X 10.1103/PhysRevE.75.061128 75, 061128 (2007).
39. N. Mingo, Phys. Rev. B 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.74.125402 74, 125402 (2006).
40. T. Yamamoto and K. Watanabe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.255503 96, 255503 (2006).
41. L. V. Keldysh, Sov. Phys. JETP 0038-5646 20, 1018 (1965).
42. T. Bornath, D. Kremp, and M. Schlanges, Phys. Rev. E 1063-651X 10.1103/PhysRevE.60.6382 60, 6382 (1999).
43. H. Schoeller, Lect. Notes Phys. 0075-8450 10.1007/3-540-46438-7-7 544, 137 (2000).
44. We use the term normal Raman scattering for the process that starts and ends in the molecular ground state, while inverse Raman starts and ends with the molecule in the excited state. The term normal in the present paper is unrelated to the normal used to distinguish from "resonant."
45. I. S. Gradshteyn and I. M. Ryzhik, Table of Integrals, Series, and Products (Academic, San Diego, 2000).
46. Note that the electron-hole contribution to damping rates in the single electron GFs, as taken into account in Refs. 27 and 28, is dropped here for simplicity. In the present consideration we focus on the effect of damping due to electron-hole excitations on the two-particle Green functions, since it is this process which directly influences the Raman signal. The latter enters via the ansatz, Eq., employed in the calculation of excitation operators correlation function.
47. Due to the assumed weak coupling between the molecular vibration and the thermal bath, the vibrational state density is almost a delta function. Hence the actual character of the distribution is not important, since the vibration population is defined by one point N (ω).
48. S. Doniach, Phys. Rev. B 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.2.3898 2, 3898 (1970).
49. J. von Delft, F. Marquardt, R. A. Smith, and V. Ambegaokar, Phys. Rev. B 0163-1829 10.1103/PhysRevB.76.195332 76, 195332 (2007).
50. In principle, the same ansatz can be used to include damping due to coupling to the laser field; however, we disregard it due to the weak electron-photon coupling assumed.
51. Equations are obtained by separating the polarization correlation functions into products of correlation functions involving d operators associated with the individual levels (this can be done when these levels do not mix by their interactions with the leads), then applying Wick's theorem to represent these correlation functions as sums of products of single electron GFs for the corresponding levels. The assumption of no level mixing can be relaxed at the price of getting more complex expressions that involve also mixed single electron GFs G 12 >,<.
52. In Eqs. two energy variables are used for each molecular electronic level. Ej (k) represents the energy variable j associated with level k.
53. Because each term in Eq. contains a product of two functions S, the substitution of 2 (K) by C2 (K) corresponds to multiplying the state to state flux by ρ R (i) ρ R (f) ≃ ρ R2, in analogy to Eq..
54. A. M. Kelley, J. Chem. Phys. 0021-9606 10.1063/1.2931540 128, 224702 (2008).
55. Z. Ioffe, T. Shamai, A. Ophir, G. Noy, I. Yutsis, K. Kfir, O. Cheshnovsky, and Y. Selzer, Nat. Nanotechnol. 3, 727 (2008). 10.1038/nnano.2008.304
56. J. R. Lombardi, R. L. Birke, L. A. Sanchez, I. Bernard, and S. C. Sun, Chem. Phys. Lett. 0009-2614 10.1016/0009-2614(84)80203-1 104, 240 (1984).
57. This result was obtained using the order of magnitude estimate based on Eq., taking R the same molecular radiative rate used to estimate the Raman intensity associated with the molecular process. Note, however, that R in Eq. is the radiative rate associated with a transition dipole of magnitude (e is the electron charge and d molecule-metal distance) that may be considerably larger than a typical molecular radiative rate.