4.8 Article

Theoretical study of the magnetic anisotropy and magnetic tunnelling in mononuclear Ni(II) complexes with potential molecular magnet behavior

期刊

CHEMICAL SCIENCE
卷 5, 期 4, 页码 1453-1462

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c3sc52984c

关键词

-

资金

  1. Serbian-Spanish collaboration project [PRI-AIBSE-2011-1230, 451-03-02635/2011-14/5]
  2. Spanish Ministerio de Industria e Innovacion [FIS2009-07083]
  3. Serbian Ministry of Science [172035]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Magnetic molecules that present a slow decay of their magnetization (molecular magnets) are very interesting both from a fundamental and applied points of view. While many approaches focus strongly on finding systems with strong magnetic anisotropy giving rise to large spin-reversal barriers, less is known on the behavior of magnetic tunnelling, which is also a fundamental component of molecular magnet behavior. In this work, we propose a model to describe both the spin-reversal barrier and magnetic tunnelling in Ni(II) trigonal bipyramidal complexes, which could be easily extended to other transitionmetal systems. Based on this model, we show the criteria that lead to the optimal complexes to find molecular magnet behavior. We test our proposal with multi-reference configuration-interaction (MRCI) and ligand-field-density-functional-theory (LF-DFT) first-principles calculations applied over several families of mononuclear Ni(II) complexes. As a salient result, we find that the complex [NiCl3(Hdabco)(2)](+) (dabco is 1,4-diazabicyclo[2.2.2]-octane) displays both a very large magnetic anisotropy energy, 524 cm(-1), and a small tunnelling splitting, 0.2 cm(-1), when compared to other systems containing the same metal. We expect molecular magnet behaviour to be observed when small magnetic fields are employed to disrupt tunnelling. These values are reached due to the choice of ligands that favor a complete destruction of the Jahn-Teller distortions through spin-orbit coupling and an unquenched orbital momentum.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据