2020
DOI: 10.1039/d0sc03078c
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Semiquinone radical-bridged M2 (M = Fe, Co, Ni) complexes with strong magnetic exchange giving rise to slow magnetic relaxation

Abstract: The use of radical bridging ligands to facilitate strong magnetic exchange between paramagnetic metal centers represents a key step toward the realization of single-molecule magnets with high operating temperatures. Moreover,...

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

1
20
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
1
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…12,21 This strategy has proven to be very effective and productive, generating diiron, 22−24 dicobalt, 25−30 and dinickel SMMs 25 with strong exchange couplings (in one example, 22 |J| > 900 cm −1 ) and U eff values up to 267(3) K 26 (U eff is the effective spin-reversal barrier). A wide range of bridging radicals have been employed to construct these dinuclear transition metal-radical SMMs, including semiquinone radical, 25 tetraoxolene radical, 24 tetraazalene radical, 22,23 nindigo radical, 30 2,2′-bipyrimidine radical, 28 tetrazine radical, 29 tetrapyridophenazine radical, 27 and 1,2,4,5-tetrakis-(methanesulfonamido)benzene) radical ligands. 26 In contrast, mononuclear transition metal-radical SMMs have received less attention despite the rapid growth in the number of transition metal-based mononuclear SMMs.…”
Section: ■ Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…12,21 This strategy has proven to be very effective and productive, generating diiron, 22−24 dicobalt, 25−30 and dinickel SMMs 25 with strong exchange couplings (in one example, 22 |J| > 900 cm −1 ) and U eff values up to 267(3) K 26 (U eff is the effective spin-reversal barrier). A wide range of bridging radicals have been employed to construct these dinuclear transition metal-radical SMMs, including semiquinone radical, 25 tetraoxolene radical, 24 tetraazalene radical, 22,23 nindigo radical, 30 2,2′-bipyrimidine radical, 28 tetrazine radical, 29 tetrapyridophenazine radical, 27 and 1,2,4,5-tetrakis-(methanesulfonamido)benzene) radical ligands. 26 In contrast, mononuclear transition metal-radical SMMs have received less attention despite the rapid growth in the number of transition metal-based mononuclear SMMs.…”
Section: ■ Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the pursuit of radical-ligand-containing SMMs, an emerging trend is to use strongly exchange-coupled redox-active bridging radicals to generate multinuclear transition metal-based SMMs. , This strategy has proven to be very effective and productive, generating diiron, dicobalt, and dinickel SMMs with strong exchange couplings (in one example, | J| > 900 cm –1 ) and U eff values up to 267(3) K 26 ( U eff is the effective spin-reversal barrier). A wide range of bridging radicals have been employed to construct these dinuclear transition metal-radical SMMs, including semiquinone radical, tetraoxolene radical, tetraazalene radical, , nindigo radical, 2,2′-bipyrimidine radical, tetrazine radical, tetrapyridophenazine radical, and 1,2,4,5-tetrakis­(methanesulfonamido)­benzene) radical ligands . In contrast, mononuclear transition metal-radical SMMs have received less attention despite the rapid growth in the number of transition metal-based mononuclear SMMs. , Current examples of mononuclear transition metal-radical SMMs are limited to cobalt–nitroxide radical complexes, cobalt–carbene radical complexes, and an iron–dithiadiazolyl radical complex .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Changes in ligand oxidation state are expected to perturb the intrinsic anisotropy of Co­(II) ions, and the presence of ligand-based radicals generates a “ladder” of different spin states via exchange interactions. While the valence tautomerism of six-coordinate cobalt-semiquinonate complexes has been studied extensively, efforts to develop transition-metal SMMs consisting of one or more radical ligands also show promise. The most common approach in this direction has employed radicals as bridging ligands between paramagnetic centers to create multimetallic complexes with large total spin ( S tot ) values. A similar strategy uses radical ligands as organic linkers in metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) that combine magnetic and microporous properties. Strong exchange coupling between a given metal and ligand radical has been shown to facilitate slow magnetic relaxation by discouraging quantum tunneling and increasing the energy gap between the ground and excited states. , In addition to these benefits, redox-noninnocent ligands capable of undergoing reversible redox events could serve as “on–off” switches for SMM behavior. , …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Representatives can be found in Dy­(III)-based complexes within the pentagonal-bipyramidal (PBP) geometry or metallocene, ,− , giving the observed magnetic hysteresis above liquid nitrogen temperature and the energy barriers over 1500 cm –1 . On the other hand, a majority of 3d transition metal SMMs within the low-coordinate environment have also been reported to show huge magnetic anisotropy with the barriers up to several hundred wavenumbers due to the first-order or enhanced second-order spin–orbit coupling (SOC). ,, In addition to the geometry modulation of single-ion magnetic anisotropy, incorporation of strong intramolecular magnetic coupling ( J ) represents another important way to achieve true bistability and longer relaxation time, in which realization of both specific geometry and strong magnetic coupling within one molecule is extremely limited . It should be mentioned that if J is not sufficiently large, the relaxation would proceed through the low-lying excited states, leading to an undesirable suppression of the SMM property.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%