1995
DOI: 10.1021/ic00111a043
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Excited State Redox Potentials of Ruthenium Diimine Complexes; Correlations with Ground State Redox Potentials and Ligand Parameters

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

13
110
0

Year Published

1999
1999
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 126 publications
(126 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
13
110
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While it is true that the ∆E 1/2 values do not quantitatively correspond to the relative emission energies of these complexes, it is important to remember that these electrochemical values neglect differences in charge repulsion and solvation energies, factors that are included in the D parameter. We have used the energy gap values obtained from spectral fitting (E 0 ) as a thermodynamic quantity similar to the E 00 parameter used by Lever 59 to give an estimation of the difference in MLCT energy gap predicted electrochemically and that observed spectroscopically. It can be expected that solvent reorganization energies will be larger in complexes with more solvent interaction, increasing the apparent E 00 value and decreasing the value of D. These and other subtle differences may be contributing to the incongruous D′ value seen for [Ru(dea) 3 ] 2+ .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While it is true that the ∆E 1/2 values do not quantitatively correspond to the relative emission energies of these complexes, it is important to remember that these electrochemical values neglect differences in charge repulsion and solvation energies, factors that are included in the D parameter. We have used the energy gap values obtained from spectral fitting (E 0 ) as a thermodynamic quantity similar to the E 00 parameter used by Lever 59 to give an estimation of the difference in MLCT energy gap predicted electrochemically and that observed spectroscopically. It can be expected that solvent reorganization energies will be larger in complexes with more solvent interaction, increasing the apparent E 00 value and decreasing the value of D. These and other subtle differences may be contributing to the incongruous D′ value seen for [Ru(dea) 3 ] 2+ .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These are MLCT in nature as evaluated from the longest-wavelength portions of absorption spectra ( 1 MLCT) and from the characteristics of the emission spectra ( 3 MLCT). [15] For instance, for [Ru(tpy) 2 ] 2 , the metal centred oxidation, E 1/2 ox (3+/2+), and the ligand centred reduction, E 1/2 red (2+/+), are +1.30 and -1.24 V, respectively, with respect to the SCE in MeCN. [16] The emission level, E em , is ca.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The idea behind the studies has been based on the assumption, that the oxidation/reduction potential of a molecule corresponds to a "solution ionisation potential", and that there should be a direct relationship between oxidation/reduction potentials and HOMO/LUMO energies. Thermodynamic correlations between optical transition energies in complex molecules and the reduction/oxidation potentials, or differences thereof, were advocated over the past forty years in diverse reports (for some elegant studies, see refs [71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78][79][80][81][82][83][84][85][86][87]. The most extensive correlations of differences in redox potentials and energies of optical transitions have been derived for a number of Rh, Ru, Os, and Fe complexes.…”
Section: Combined Spectroscopic and Electrochemical Approach To Probimentioning
confidence: 99%