Evidence Hub

In silico prediction of annihilators for triplet–triplet annihilation upconversion via auxiliary-field quantum Monte Carlo

John L. Weber, Emily M Churchill, S. Jockusch, E. J. Arthur, Andrew B. Pun, Shi-Wei Zhang, L. Campos, R. Friesner et al.

Chemical Science, 2020

17 citations

Abstract

The energy of the lowest-lying triplet state (T1) relative to the ground and first-excited singlet states (S0, S1) plays a critical role in optical multiexcitonic processes of organic chromophores. Focusing on triplet–triplet annihilation (TTA) upconversion, the S0 to T1 energy gap, known as the triplet energy, is difficult to measure experimentally for most molecules of interest. Ab initio predictions can provide a useful alternative, however low-scaling electronic structure methods such as the Kohn–Sham and time-dependent variants of Density Functional Theory (DFT) rely heavily on the fraction of exact exchange chosen for a given functional, and tend to be unreliable when strong electronic correlation is present. Here, we use auxiliary-field quantum Monte Carlo (AFQMC), a scalable electronic structure method capable of accurately describing even strongly correlated molecules, to predict the triplet energies for a series of candidate annihilators for TTA upconversion, including 9,10 substituted anthracenes and substituted benzothiadiazole (BTD) and benzoselenodiazole (BSeD) compounds. We compare our results to predictions from a number of commonly used DFT functionals, as well as DLPNO-CCSD(T0), a localized approximation to coupled cluster with singles, doubles, and perturbative triples. Together with S1 estimates from absorption/emission spectra, which are well-reproduced by TD-DFT calculations employing the range-corrected hybrid functional CAM-B3LYP, we provide…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a simulation / modelling, done in computer models (in silico), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free