Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Based on density functional theory, this paper systematically investigates the external electric field-regulated charge-transfer behavior of two donor:acceptor interfaces, PBDB-T:CF3-BDP-Cz and PBDB-T:CF3-BDP-TPA. These two BODIPY-based acceptors share the same BODIPY core but differ in their terminal donor groups, namely carbazole (Cz) and triphenylamine (TPA), providing a well-defined model system for elucidating the relationship between molecular structure and interfacial charge transfer. The results show that the different terminal groups lead to significant differences in the electric-field response mechanisms of the two interfaces. For the PBDB-T:CF3-BDP-Cz interface, the excited-state properties show a relatively weak response to the electric field, while the charge-transfer rate exhibits a nonmonotonic dependence on electric-field intensity, and an optimal electric-field range is identified that favors charge separation. The charge-transfer characteristics of the PBDB-T:CF3-BDP-TPA interface are more sensitive to changes in the electric field. Although the charge-recombination rate is consistently higher than the charge-separation rate throughout the entire electric-field range, the relative efficiency of charge separation continuously increases with increasing electric-field strength because the charge-separation rate increases more rapidly than the charge-recombination rate. This study reveals the intrinsic relationship between terminal-group structure, electric-field modulation, and interfacial charge-transfer mechanism, providing a theoretical basis for understanding the field-controlled charge-separation mechanism of organic photovoltaic interfaces.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: