2000
DOI: 10.1007/bf03162398
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

EPR of a fullerene-molecule-derived paramagnetic center as a mesoscopic conducting object

Abstract: Discussion of the g-factor value of fullerene is based on the model of itinerant electrons restricted to the surface of the fullerene molecule C hq . The Ag shift, i.e., the difference between the experimental g-factor and the g-factor of free electron Ag = g -2.0023 for C is negative as for a very small metallic conducting particle. g-factor value is proportional to the interaction between itinerant electrons in the conduction band, thus the Ag is negative for CFI and C having less than half filled conduction… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0
2

Year Published

2002
2002
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
3
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The g-tensor components of the photo-generated electron localized at the fullerene cage in all blends with P3HT were very similar to those in pure fullerene derivatives (data in Supplementary Materials ), and all of them were well below the free electron g-factor (g = 2.0023). Such negative deviation most probably results from the spin–orbit coupling with the unoccupied π-orbital, while positive deviation has been considered to arise from the spin–orbit coupling with the occupied orbitals [ 37 , 38 ]. The LESR signals of electrons at the fullerene cage showed only slight differences between the various molecule blends, indicating a rather weak influence of the different fullerene functional groups.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The g-tensor components of the photo-generated electron localized at the fullerene cage in all blends with P3HT were very similar to those in pure fullerene derivatives (data in Supplementary Materials ), and all of them were well below the free electron g-factor (g = 2.0023). Such negative deviation most probably results from the spin–orbit coupling with the unoccupied π-orbital, while positive deviation has been considered to arise from the spin–orbit coupling with the occupied orbitals [ 37 , 38 ]. The LESR signals of electrons at the fullerene cage showed only slight differences between the various molecule blends, indicating a rather weak influence of the different fullerene functional groups.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Observed changes of line width, together with a small g-shift from g e -spectroscopic splitting factor of free electron (g − g e = ∆g = 6 × 10 −4 ; mean value) for line (2) of C 6 H 5 NO 2 -filled ACFs, enabled us to estimate the size of graphite nanoparticles (approximately 1.34 nm) in which distance between graphene plates could be modified by guests molecules [11]. Such an approach was also proposed for ultra dispersed diamond (UDD) [8] and fullerenes [12]. Line width and g-factor of the component (3) of observed EPR spectrum strongly depend on temperature -it can be explained as a surface effect of ACFs.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The four‐component spectrum in Shungite IV belongs just to such complexes. Their g ‐factors are close to 2.0000 17, 18. Such complexes exist independently from the conducting carbon system and the deep levels of the band gap present their energy states.…”
mentioning
confidence: 78%