Medina Edinson, Pinter Balazs
Departamento de Quı́mica, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa Marı́a, Av. España 1680, 2390123 Valparaı́so, Chile.
J Phys Chem A. 2020 May 28;124(21):4223-4234. doi: 10.1021/acs.jpca.9b10238. Epub 2020 May 15.
In this study a detailed scrutiny of the electronic structure changes during the redox events of the oxidative and reductive quenching cycles of the representative homoleptic and heteroleptic octahedral iridium [Ir(bpy)(ppy)] ( = 0, 1, 2, and 3) and ruthenium [Ru(bpy)(ppy)] ( = 1, 2, and 3) photoredox catalysts is provided through the corresponding electron density difference Δρ() distributions. The systematic analysis of the Δρ() distributions provides intuitive insights into the details of the metal- and ligand-centered electron transfer processes that take place in the different excited- and ground-state redox steps of classical photoredox catalysis. In addition to the structural metrics, the measured ground-state reduction potentials were also reproduced with great accuracy, typically within 0.15 V, when using the TPSSh functional in combination with the Def2-TZVP basis set coupled to reparameterized implicit solvation model (SMD). We computed the excited-state reduction potentials of these ruthenium and iridium complexes without using TD-DFT, but by directly computing the solution-state Gibbs free energy of the triplet MLCT state, giving good agreement with respective experiments. The analyzed Δρ() maps reveal the characteristic features of metal- and ligand-centered reductions and oxidations in both ground- and excited states and metal-to-ligand charge transfers (MLCT), sometimes perturbed by additional ligand-to-ligand charge transfer (LLCT) contributions. One of the most interesting features of ligand-centered redox processes is the localization of the accumulated electron density at one redox-active ligand in the case of heteroleptic systems [Ir(bpy)(ppy)] and [Ru(bpy)(ppy)], which is in contrast to the delocalized nature of the ligands-hosted charge in homoleptic photoredox catalysts, such as the classical [Ru(bpy)] system.
在本研究中,通过相应的电子密度差Δρ(r)分布,对代表性的均配和异配八面体铱[Ir(bpy)₃⁻ₙ(ppy)ₙ](n = 0、1、2和3)和钌[Ru(bpy)₃⁻ₙ(ppy)ₙ](n = 1、2和3)光氧化还原催化剂在氧化猝灭和还原猝灭循环的氧化还原事件过程中的电子结构变化进行了详细研究。对Δρ(r)分布的系统分析为经典光氧化还原催化不同激发态和基态氧化还原步骤中发生的以金属和配体为中心的电子转移过程细节提供了直观的见解。除了结构指标外,当使用TPSSh泛函结合Def2-TZVP基组并耦合重新参数化的隐式溶剂化模型(SMD)时,测量的基态还原电位也能非常精确地重现,通常在0.15 V以内。我们没有使用TD-DFT,而是通过直接计算三重态MLCT态的溶液态吉布斯自由能来计算这些钌和铱配合物的激发态还原电位,与各自的实验结果吻合良好。分析的Δρ(r)图揭示了基态和激发态中以金属和配体为中心的还原和氧化以及金属到配体的电荷转移(MLCT)的特征,有时还会受到额外的配体到配体电荷转移(LLCT)贡献的干扰。以配体为中心的氧化还原过程最有趣的特征之一是在异配体系[Ir(bpy)₃⁻ₙ(ppy)ₙ]和[Ru(bpy)₃⁻ₙ(ppy)ₙ]中,积累的电子密度集中在一个氧化还原活性配体上,这与均配光氧化还原催化剂(如经典的[Ru(bpy)₃]体系)中配体承载电荷的离域性质形成对比。