A series of π-aromatic-rich
cyclometalated ruthenium(II)-(2,2′-bipyridine)
complexes ([Ru(bpy)2(πAr-CM)]+) in which πAr-CM is diphenylpyrazine or 1-phenylisoquinoline
were prepared. The [Ru(bpy)2(πAr-CM)]+ complexes had remarkably high phosphorescence rate constants, k
RAD(p), and the intrinsic phosphorescence efficiencies
(ιem(p) = k
RAD(p)/(νem(p))3) of these complexes were found to be twice
the magnitudes of simply constructed cyclometalated ruthenium(II)
complexes ([Ru(bpy)2(sc-CM)]+), where νem(p) is the phosphorescence frequency and sc-CM is 2-phenylpyridine,
benzo[h]quinoline, or 2-phenylpyrimidine. Density
functional theory (DFT) modeling of the [Ru(bpy)2(CM)]+ complexes indicated numerous singlet metal-to-ligand charge
transfers for 1MLCT-(Ru-bpy) and 1MLCT-(Ru-CM),
excited states in the low-energy absorption band and 1ππ*-(aromatic
ligand) (1ππ*-LAr) excited states
in the high-energy band. DFT modeling of these complexes also indicated
phosphorescence-emitting state (Te) configurations with
primary MLCT-(Ru-bpy) characteristics. The variation in ιem(p) for the spin-forbidden Te (3MLCT-(Ru-bpy))
excited state of the complex system that was examined in this study
can be understood through the spin–orbit coupling (SOC)-mediated
sum of intensity stealing (∑SOCM-IS) contribution from the
primary intensity of the low-energy 1MLCT states and second-order
intensity perturbation from the significant configuration between
the low-energy 1MLCT and high-energy intense 1ππ*-LAr states. In addition, the observation
of unusually high ιem(p) magnitudes for these [Ru(bpy)2(πAr-CM)]+ complexes can be attributed
to the values for both intensity factors in the ∑SOCM-IS formalism
being individually greater than those for [Ru(bpy)2(sc-CM)]+ ions.