{"title":"Impact of Structure on Excitation Energies and S1-T1 Energy Gaps of Asymmetrical Systems of Interest for Inverted Singlet-Triplet Gaps","authors":"Gideon Odonkor, Samuel O. Odoh","doi":"10.1002/jcc.70090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Computational investigations of Inverted Singlet-Triplet (INVEST) emitters often rely on ADC(2) and TD-DFT excitation energies (EEs) obtained with the vertical approximation. Here, we first considered several cyclazine derivatives and examine the sensitivity of vertical EEs (VEEs) as well as singlet-triplet gaps, ΔE<sub>S1T1</sub> gaps, to the level at which the ground state (S<sub>0</sub>) structure was optimized. For cyclazine, VEEs and vertical gaps from ADC(2) or TD-DFT are spread over a narrow range (< 0.064 eV) whether the S<sub>0</sub> structure is optimized with various DFT, CCSD, and RI-MP2 methods. However, for asymmetric cyclazines, depending on the protocol for optimizing S<sub>0</sub> structures, not only are VEEs spread over a substantially wider range (up to 0.75 eV) but so are vertical ΔE<sub>S1T1</sub> gaps (up to 0.30 eV), leading to cases where, with different S<sub>0</sub> structures, one obtains positive vertical ΔE<sub>S1T1</sub> gaps or significantly negative gaps. We relate this behavior to the introduction of significant asymmetry and bond-length variations in the cyclazine derivatives, formed by ligand functionalization or modification of the cyclazine core. On a more positive note, adiabatic EEs (AEEs) and adiabatic ΔE<sub>S1T1</sub> gaps display significantly lower sensitivity (7–30× less) to the geometry optimization protocols than their vertical analogs. Crucially, for cyclazine, the M06-HF functional with 100% non-local exchange provides the closest S<sub>0</sub> geometry to available CCSD(T) data. We show that this effect exists also for other frameworks (e.g., azulene, pentaazaphenalene, and non-alternant polycyclic hydrocarbons) that have been considered for the INVEST property, with VEEs spread over a broader range of up to 1.19 eV and vertical ΔE<sub>S1T1</sub> gaps over a range of 0.62 eV. For INVEST emitters, it is therefore extremely important to judiciously choose the computational protocol for optimizing ground state geometries, in computing VEEs and vertical ΔE<sub>S1T1</sub> gaps.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":188,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Computational Chemistry","volume":"46 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Computational Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jcc.70090","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Computational investigations of Inverted Singlet-Triplet (INVEST) emitters often rely on ADC(2) and TD-DFT excitation energies (EEs) obtained with the vertical approximation. Here, we first considered several cyclazine derivatives and examine the sensitivity of vertical EEs (VEEs) as well as singlet-triplet gaps, ΔES1T1 gaps, to the level at which the ground state (S0) structure was optimized. For cyclazine, VEEs and vertical gaps from ADC(2) or TD-DFT are spread over a narrow range (< 0.064 eV) whether the S0 structure is optimized with various DFT, CCSD, and RI-MP2 methods. However, for asymmetric cyclazines, depending on the protocol for optimizing S0 structures, not only are VEEs spread over a substantially wider range (up to 0.75 eV) but so are vertical ΔES1T1 gaps (up to 0.30 eV), leading to cases where, with different S0 structures, one obtains positive vertical ΔES1T1 gaps or significantly negative gaps. We relate this behavior to the introduction of significant asymmetry and bond-length variations in the cyclazine derivatives, formed by ligand functionalization or modification of the cyclazine core. On a more positive note, adiabatic EEs (AEEs) and adiabatic ΔES1T1 gaps display significantly lower sensitivity (7–30× less) to the geometry optimization protocols than their vertical analogs. Crucially, for cyclazine, the M06-HF functional with 100% non-local exchange provides the closest S0 geometry to available CCSD(T) data. We show that this effect exists also for other frameworks (e.g., azulene, pentaazaphenalene, and non-alternant polycyclic hydrocarbons) that have been considered for the INVEST property, with VEEs spread over a broader range of up to 1.19 eV and vertical ΔES1T1 gaps over a range of 0.62 eV. For INVEST emitters, it is therefore extremely important to judiciously choose the computational protocol for optimizing ground state geometries, in computing VEEs and vertical ΔES1T1 gaps.
期刊介绍:
This distinguished journal publishes articles concerned with all aspects of computational chemistry: analytical, biological, inorganic, organic, physical, and materials. The Journal of Computational Chemistry presents original research, contemporary developments in theory and methodology, and state-of-the-art applications. Computational areas that are featured in the journal include ab initio and semiempirical quantum mechanics, density functional theory, molecular mechanics, molecular dynamics, statistical mechanics, cheminformatics, biomolecular structure prediction, molecular design, and bioinformatics.