Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A π‐conjugated polymer containing a dithiafulvene unit and a bipyridyl unit was prepared by cycloaddition polymerization of aldothioketene derived from 5,5′‐diethynyl‐2,2′‐bipyridine. Ultraviolet–visible (UV–vis) absorption spectra showed that the π‐conjugation system of the polymer expanded more effectively than that of a benzene analogue of poly(dithiafulvene) obtained from 1,4‐diethynylbenzene. Cyclic voltammetry measurements indicated that the dithiafulvene–bipyridyl polymer was a weaker electron‐donor polymer than the benzene analogue. These results supported the idea that the incorporation of the electron‐accepting bipyridyl moiety into conjugated poly(dithiafulvene) induced an intramolecular charge‐transfer (CT) effect between the units. Treatment of the dithiafulvene–bipyridyl polymer with bis(2,2′‐bipyridyl)dichlororuthenium (II) [Ru(bpy)2Cl2] afforded a ruthenium–polymer complex. A cyclic voltammogram of the complex showed broad redox peaks, which indicated electronic interaction between the dithiafulvene and tris(bipyridyl) ruthenium complex. The dithiafulvene–bipyridyl polymer formed CT complexes with 7,7,8,8‐tetracycanoquinodimethane (TCNQ) in dimethyl sulfoxide. The UV–vis absorption indicated that the resulting CT complex contained anion radical of TCNQ and partially charge‐transferred TCNQ. The polymer showed an unusually high electrical conductivity of 3.1 × 10−4 S/cm in its nondoped state due to the effective donor–acceptor interaction between the bipyridine unit and the dithiafulvene unit.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Naka et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: