Symmetry or asymmetry of k_ET and i_STMvs. potential curves

Abstract

The symmetry or asymmetry of STM current vs. bias potential and of electron transfer (ET) rate vs. overpotential curves is discussed for ET and for STM patterns across ordered monolayers. The superexchange expression for the electronic coupling matrix element, the Fermi–Dirac distribution and, for the ET reaction, the reorganization, are included. A mean potential approximation is assumed for the effect of bias or overpotential on the electronic orbitals or the ordered monolayer. Consequences for the symmetry vs. asymmetry of the ln(k_ET)vs. overpotential and for the ln(i_STM) and pattern vs. bias are described. Examples of some relevant experiments are considered.

References

1. (a) C. E. D. Chidsey, Science, 1991, 251, 919; (b) J. N. Richardson, S. R. Peck, L. S. Curtin, L. M. Tender, R. H. Terrill, M. T. Carter, R. W. Murray, G. K. Rowe and S. E. Creager, J. Phys. Chem., 1995, 99, 766; (c) H. O. Finklea and D. D. Hanshew, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1992, 114, 3173; (d) G. K. Rowe and S. E. Creager, Langmuir, 1991, 7, 2307; (e) C. J. Miller and M. Grätzel, J. Phys. Chem., 1991, 95, 5225; (f) A. Becka and C. J. Miller, J. Phys. Chem., 1992, 96, 2657; (g) J. Xu, H-I. Li and Y. Zhang, J. Phys. Chem., 1993, 97, 11497; (h) J. N. Richardson, G. K. Rowe, M. J. Carter, L. M. Tender, L. S. Curtin, S. R. Peck and R. W. Murray, Electrochim. Acta, 1995, 40, 1331; (i) J. F. Smalley, S. W. Feldberg, C. E. D. Chidsey, M. R. Linford, M. D. Newton and Y-P. Liu, J. Phys. Chem., 1995, 99, 13141; (j) J. Cheng, G. Saghi-Szabo, J. A. Tossell and C. J. Miller, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1996, 118, 680.
2. See e.g. J. Frommer, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl, 1992, 31, 1298; J. P. Rabe and S. Bucholz, Science, 1991, 153, 424; G. C. McGonigal, R. H. Bernhardt and D. J. Thompson, J. Appl. Phys. Lett., 1990, 57, 28; G. C. McGonigal, R. H. Bernhardt, Y. Yeo and D. J. Thompson, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B, 1991, 9, 401; J. P. Rabe and S. Bucholz, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl., 1992, 31, 189; Y. H. Yeo, G. C. McGonigal and D. J. Thomson, Langmuir, 1993, 9, 649; J. P. Rabe and S. Bucholz, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B., 1991, 2, 1126.
3. C. L. Claypool, F. Faglioni, W. A. Goddard, III, H. B. Gray, N. S. Lewis and R. A. Marcus, to be submitted..
4. R. A. Marcus and N. Sutin, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1985, 811, 265.
5. O-Y. Hui, R. A. Marcus and B. Kallebring, J. Chem. Phys., 1994, 100, 7814.
6. R. A. Marcus, unpublished data..
7. See R. A. Marcus, J. Chem. Phys., 1993, 98, 5604.
8. Y. N. Demkov, Sov. Phys. Dokl., 1966, 11, 138; Y. N. Demkov and V. I. Osherov, Sov. Phys.-JETP, 1968, 26, 916; S. Brundobler and V. Elser, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen., 1993, 26, 1211 cf. S. Tsuneyuki, N. Shima and M. Tsukada, Surf. Sci., 1987, 186, 26.
9. R. A. Marcus, Disc. Faraday Soc., 1960, 29, 21; G. King and A. Warshel, J. Chem. Phys., 1990, 93, 8682; R. A. Marcus, P. Siddarth, in Photoprocesses in Transition Metal Complexes, Biosystems and Other Molecules: Experiment and Theory, NATO ASI Ser. C, 1992, 376, 49..
10. C-P. Hsu and R. A. Marcus, J. Chem. Phys., submitted..
11. R. Parsons, in Modern Aspects of Electrochemistry, ed. J. O'M. Bockris, Academic Press, New York, 1954, ch. 3..
12. R. A. Marcus, ONR Report No. 12, 1957, reprinted in Special Topics in Electrochemistry, ed. P. A. Rock, Elsevier, New York, 1977, p. 210..
13. R. A. Marcus, J. Chem. Phys., 1965, 43, 679.
14. R. A. Marcus, in Les Prix Nobel, ed. T. Frangmyr, Nobel Foundation, Almquist and Wiksell, Stockholm, 1993, p. 63;cf. R. A. Marcus, Angew. Chem., Int., Ed. Engl., 1993, 32, 111.