Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 71 references

Dipole-quadrupole coupling in triplet exciton-polaron quenching in a phosphorescent OLED emission layer

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper shows that at the roughly 1.5 nm separations where triplet excitons meet hole polarons in a phosphorescent OLED, dipole-quadrupole coupling, not the standard Förster dipole-dipole mechanism, dominates triplet-polaron quenching…

desk verdict A solid computational case that dipole-quadrupole coupling closes the TPQ Förster-radius gap in m-MTDATA:Ir(ppy)2acac; the neglected exchange term is the main caveat. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.10794 v1 pith:GWKGBDKP submitted 2025-06-12 physics.atm-clus physics.chem-phphysics.comp-ph

Clint van Hoesel , Reinder Coehoorn , Peter A. Bobbert This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.atm-clusphysics.chem-phphysics.comp-ph
keywords Triplet-polaronquenchingPhosphorescentOLEDsFörsterenergytransferDipole-quadrupolecouplingTime-dependentdensityfunctionaltheorySpectraloverlapmethodEffectiveradiusOLEDefficiencyroll-off
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper asks why two standard ways of quantifying triplet-exciton–polaron quenching (TPQ) in a phosphorescent OLED give rates that differ by a factor of about three. It shows by quantum-chemical calculation that the accepted Förster dipole-dipole approximation breaks down at the ~1.5 nm separations where quenching actually occurs, and that dipole-quadrupole coupling dominates there. Adding the quadrupolar channel raises the spectral-overlap estimate of the effective Förster radius from 2.7–3.1 nm to about 3.5–3.7 nm, close to the 3.8 nm obtained from device fits. The implication is that TPQ rates should be judged from the quadrupolar absorption spectrum of the charged host, not the dipolar spectrum alone, which matters for designing more efficient and stable OLEDs.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the multipole expansion of the direct Coulomb coupling between the donor, a triplet exciton on Ir(ppy)2acac, and the acceptor, a hole excitation on m-MTDATA+, $J_{ij} \approx \mu_i\mu_j\kappa_{ij}/r^3 + 3\mu_i Q_j\kappa_{\mathrm{dq},ij}/(2r^4)$, truncated after the dipole-quadrupole term. To go beyond the Förster approximation, the paper defines a quadrupolar molar absorption coefficient $\varepsilon_q^A(E)$ from transition quadrupole moments and a Franck-Condon weighted density of states, and writes the dipole-quadrupole rate as $k_{dq}(r)=\tau_r^{-1}(R_{dq}/r)^8$ with $\langle\kappa_{dq}^2\rangle=1$. The exactly evaluated direct Coulomb integrals with orthogonalized TD-DFT wavefunctions serve as the arbiter, showing which multipole term actually dominates and validating the $r^{-8}$ regime before wavefunction overlap sets in below about 1 nm.

What would settle it

Compute the TPQ rate for Ir(ppy)2acac–m-MTDATA+ pairs at center-of-mass distances of 1–3 nm including the full exchange (antisymmetrized) Coulomb coupling and all TD-DFT excitations beyond the 6 singlets, 18 triplets, and excitations 3–10 of the charged host; if the distance dependence at about 1.5 nm is no longer dominated by an $r^{-8}$ dipole-quadrupole term, or if the effective Förster radius from the full rate no longer lands near 3.8 nm, the central claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the Förster dipole-dipole approximation fails for triplet-polaron quenching in the phosphorescent OLED system m-MTDATA:Ir(ppy)2acac at the distances that actually matter. Computing TPQ rates from Fermi's Golden Rule with exactly evaluated direct Coulomb couplings between the triplet exciton on the emitter and the hole polaron on the charged host, the authors find an $r^{-8}$ distance dependence for separations below about 5 nm, the signature of dipole-quadrupole coupling, and dominance of that channel below about 2.3 nm. Because hole polarons hop rapidly and can approach an exciton to an average distance of roughly 1.5 nm, dipole-quadrupole coupling, not dipole-dipole coupling, controls TPQ. Introducing a quadrupolar molar absorption coefficient for the charged host and a dipole-quadrupole radius $R_{dq}=2.6$ nm, the authors obtain an effective Förster radius $R_{F,\mathrm{eff}}\approx 3.5$–$3.7$ nm, matching the $R_F=3.8$ nm found from device fits and resolving the factor-of-three rate discrepancy with spectral-overlap estimates. The discrepancy is therefore not due to solution-versus-film environmental differences, which the calculations rule out, but to the missing quadrupolar channel.

Load-bearing premise

The claim rests on quantum-chemical rates at 1–2 nm separations that leave out wavefunction-overlap (exchange) effects and higher excited states; if those omitted effects contribute substantially at such distances, the dipole-quadrupole dominance could shrink.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The spectral-overlap method for TPQ must include the quadrupolar absorption spectrum of the charged host; using only the dipolar spectrum underestimates the quenching rate by a factor of roughly 3 to 8 in this system.
  • The effective Förster radius defined by $R_{F,\mathrm{eff}} = (R_F^6 + c_{dq} R_{dq}^8/r_0^2)^{1/6}$, with $c_{dq}\approx 5/7$ to $0.83$, brings the spectral-overlap estimate (3.5–3.7 nm) into agreement with the device-fitted value of 3.8 nm.
  • In systems where hole polarons are confined to the host, TPQ is governed by short-range multipole coupling because fast polaron hopping lets polarons approach triplet excitons within about 1.5 nm.
  • For emitters where polarons are confined to the compact emitter molecule itself, Förster transfer is likely sufficient; the failure is specific to extended, flexible host molecules and host-confined polarons.
  • Discrepancies between spectral-overlap and device-fit Förster radii reported in biological exciton diffusion and quantum dot systems may likewise trace to neglected multipole coupling.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same logic suggests that other energy-transfer contexts in which the acceptor excitation carries charge over a large intramolecular distance, such as biological chromophores or quantum-dot solids, may show systematic spectral-overlap underestimates; the multipole channel offers a common explanation worth testing.
  • A practical design rule follows: for host-confined hole polarons, minimizing TPQ means suppressing the quadrupolar absorption of the charged host in the emitter's emission window, not only its dipolar absorption; host variants with lower transition quadrupole moments could be compared directly.
  • Because exchange coupling was neglected, the true TPQ rate at very close approach could be even larger than the dipole-quadrupole rate, so the effective radius of 3.5–3.7 nm may be a lower bound; measuring operational lifetimes in hosts engineered for small quadrupolar overlap would test this.
  • The closeness of the continuum and simple-cubic lattice values of $c_{dq}$ suggests the correction is fairly insensitive to host morphology, so the result may transfer across amorphous host materials beyond m-MTDATA.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper addresses the discrepancy between spectral-overlap (SO) and Förster-fit (FF) determinations of the triplet-polaron quenching (TPQ) rate in a phosphorescent OLED layer (host m-MTDATA, emitter Ir(ppy)2acac). It computes dipolar and quadrupolar absorption spectra of m-MTDATA+ from MD/TD-DFT, calculates TPQ rates from direct Coulomb integrals via Fermi's Golden Rule (Eq. 14), and observes a transition from r^-6 to r^-8 distance scaling below about 5 nm. By defining a quadrupolar molar absorption coefficient (Eq. 3), it obtains a dipole-quadrupole radius R_dq = 2.6 nm, which, combined with R_F = 2.7–3.1 nm in Eq. 6, gives an effective Förster radius R_F,eff ≈ 3.5–3.7 nm, close to the device-fitted value of 3.8 nm. The central claim is that at the average TPQ distance of about 1.5 nm the Förster dipole-dipole approximation fails and dipole-quadrupole coupling dominates.

Significance. If correct, the paper provides a mechanistic explanation for the SO/FF discrepancy and a practical route for screening host-emitter pairs. Its strengths are the multiple independent calculational routes (exact direct Coulomb rates and a separately computed quadrupolar spectral overlap), the explicit treatment of conformer sampling and environmental embedding, and the open-data statement. The r^-8 regime in Fig. 4 and the independently obtained R_dq = 2.6 nm mutually support the existence of a dipole-quadrupole contribution. However, the quantitative resolution claim is contingent on the neglected exchange channel and on several averaging and convergence choices, which are not fully quantified in the current manuscript.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section II, final paragraph; Methods IV.G, Eq. 14] The calculated Fermi Golden Rule rate in Eq. 14 includes only direct Coulomb integrals J_ij, and the Methods state explicitly 'We do not consider the exchange part.' The regime in which dipole-quadrupole dominance is claimed is r ≈ 1–2 nm, with an average TPQ distance of about 1.5 nm from Eq. 2, and the paper itself concedes that exchange-mediated TPQ 'could become important for very small intermolecular distances' and that the r^-8 fit breaks down near 1 nm because the NTOs overlap. No quantitative bound is given for the exchange contribution. Since Eq. 6 constructs R_F,eff from the sum of dipole-dipole and dipole-quadrupole rates only, an appreciable exchange rate would change the inferred effective radius and the comparison with the fitted 3.8 nm. The qualitative statement that dipole-quadrupole coupling is more important than dipole-dipole coupling is unaffected, but the quantitative resolution claim requires either an exchange estimate or a reformulation as a lower-bound statement for the Coulombic channel.
  2. [Section II, Eq. 6; Methods IV.I] The continuum derivation of c_dq = 5/7 appears inconsistent with a three-dimensional volume average. For uniform site density, ∫_{r0}^∞ r^{-8} r^2 dr / ∫_{r0}^∞ r^{-6} r^2 dr = (3/5) r0^{-2}, giving c_dq = 3/5 rather than 5/7. In addition, the lattice expression in Eq. 16, c_dq = a Σ r^{-4}/Σ r^{-3}, is not convergent in three dimensions because Σ r^{-3} diverges, so its relation to the coefficient in Eq. 6 needs clarification. With c_dq = 3/5 the quoted R_F,eff values decrease by roughly 0.05–0.1 nm; the physical conclusion survives, but the derivation as written is not transparent and should be corrected or expanded.
  3. [Section II, Fig. 3(b) and Eq. 5; Methods IV.C] The central R_dq = 2.6 nm is computed from quadrupolar absorption spectra of only 21 conformers, whereas the dipolar spectrum is averaged over 163 conformers. The individual quadrupolar conformer spectra shown in Fig. S3 display substantial variation, and the paper reports 2σ confidence bands for the spectra but not for R_dq itself or for R_F,eff. The sensitivity of the headline numbers to the conformer sample should be quantified, for example by bootstrap or block averaging. Without such a quantification, the closeness of R_F,eff to the device value of 3.8 nm is not established beyond a single realization.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Methods IV.D] The exact direct Coulomb rates are computed with a def2-SVP basis and a restricted excitation window (6 lowest singlets and 18 lowest triplets of the emitter, excitations 3–10 of the host). A brief convergence statement with respect to basis set and excitation window would strengthen the quantitative claims.
  2. [Section II, Eq. 2] The nearest-neighbor distance r0 ≈ 1 nm enters both the average TPQ distance and the effective Förster radius in Eq. 6. Since R_F,eff varies non-negligibly with r0 (roughly as R_dq^{8/3} r0^{-1/3}), reporting a sensitivity range for r0 would be helpful.
  3. [Section IV.H, Eq. 15] The orientation factor expansion in Eq. 15 is written for a donor transition dipole interacting with an acceptor transition quadrupole; the notation is dense. A short definition of the unit vectors and tensors for each Cartesian component, or a reference to a standard multipole expansion, would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the dipole-quadrupole radius is computed from ab initio spectral overlap, not fitted to the device benchmark; the cited prior experiments are external benchmarks.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is self-contained and does not reduce to its inputs. The dipole-quadrupole radius R_dq = 2.6 nm is obtained by applying Eq. 5 to the calculated quadrupolar absorption spectrum defined in Eq. 3; it is not fitted to the direct Coulomb rates in Fig. 4, and the r^-8 distance dependence is independently visible in those exact direct-Coulomb calculations. The effective Förster radius R_F,eff ≈ 3.5-3.7 nm is computed from Eq. 6 using the independently obtained R_F and R_dq and then compared with, rather than fitted to, the device value R_F = 3.8 nm from Ref. [17]. The average TPQ distance estimate in Eq. 2 is a rough geometric argument; if the r^-8 rate were used instead, the average event distance would be even smaller, which would strengthen rather than create the dipole-quadrupole dominance claim. Citations to the authors' earlier experimental work (Refs. [17], [20], [24]) supply measured spectra and device fits that serve as external benchmarks, not as constraints imposed on the present quantum-chemical calculations, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from prior work to force the result. The principal limitation, explicitly acknowledged in Section IV.G ('We do not consider the exchange part') and Section III ('we did not account for TPQ mediated by exchange coupling'), is the neglect of exchange coupling, which could modify quantitative rates in the 1-2 nm range; however, this is a physical uncertainty rather than a circular step, because the direct Coulomb rates and the spectral-overlap R_dq are independent first-principles quantities whose values are not derived from the device target.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. The main free parameters are the dielectric constant, the classical reorganization energy, and the nearest-neighbor distance. The most consequential domain assumptions are the accuracy of TD-DFT, the neglect of exchange coupling, and the continuum treatment of host ordering. These are all acknowledged or implicit in the methods.

free parameters (3)
  • environment dielectric constant ε_r = 3
    Used for all COSMO embeddings and for scaling TPQ rates. The actual DCM solvent has ε_r ≈ 2.03 and the film value is not independently measured; the authors justify 3 as a typical organic semiconductor value. This affects absorption spectra and TPQ rates.
  • classical reorganization energy λ_cl = 0.05 eV
    Set by hand in Eq. 7 for low-frequency phonon modes not explicitly included. It shapes the Franck-Condon weighted densities of states and therefore the spectral overlaps and rates.
  • nearest-neighbor distance r0 = ~1 nm
    Used in Eq. 2 to estimate the average TPQ distance ⟨r⟩ ≈ 1.5 nm and in Eq. 6 to compute RF,eff. Approximated from typical molecular packing; not measured for the specific blend.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Fermi's Golden Rule with direct Coulomb coupling describes TPQ rates
    Used throughout Methods G; assumes incoherent, weak-coupling transfer and that the rate is proportional to the square of the direct Coulomb matrix element times Franck-Condon weighted DOS.
  • domain assumption TD-DFT with B3LYP and Tamm-Dancoff approximation gives accurate excitation energies, transition dipole and quadrupole moments
    Underlies all spectra and couplings; no benchmark against higher-level wavefunction methods is provided in the paper.
  • domain assumption Exchange coupling is negligible at relevant distances
    The paper states in Section II that exchange-mediated TPQ is not accounted for and could be important at very small intermolecular distances. This is a load-bearing assumption for the claim that dipole-quadrupole coupling is the dominant short-range mechanism.
  • domain assumption Dynamic isotropic averaging applies with κ^2 = 2/3 and κ_dq^2 = 1
    Justified by fast polaron hopping relative to exciton decay; used in Eqs. 1, 5, and 15 for orientation-averaged rates.
  • domain assumption The host can be modeled as a continuum beyond the nearest-neighbor distance for average distance and effective Förster radius estimates
    Used for Eqs. 2 and 6; the separately performed simple cubic lattice sum gives a similar c_dq value, providing partial support.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dipole-quadrupole coupling in triplet exciton-polaron quenching in a phosphorescent OLED emission layer." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GWKGBDKP

@misc{pith2026250610794,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dipole-quadrupole coupling in triplet exciton-polaron quenching in a phosphorescent OLED emission layer},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GWKGBDKP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.10794}
}
read the original abstract

Improving the efficiency and stability of organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs) will further expand their present success in display applications. Triplet exciton-polaron quenching (TPQ) is an important cause of limited efficiency and stability in modern phosphorescent OLEDs, where triplet excitons are the emitting species. Lack of understanding of the TPQ mechanism in these OLEDs impedes the development of more efficient and stable OLEDs. We investigate the TPQ mechanism for triplet excitons on a phosphorescent guest interacting with hole polarons on a host. Our quantum-chemical calculations show that at distances relevant for TPQ the F\"orster approximation for the TPQ rate fails and that dipole-quadrupole coupling is dominant. This resolves a discrepancy between estimates of the TPQ rate obtained from an OLED device study and from the overlap between the emission spectrum of the emitter and absorption spectrum of the charged host. Equivalently to the F\"orster radius for dipole-dipole TPQ, the dipole-quadrupole TPQ rate can be quantified by a dipole-quadrupole radius obtained from the overlap between the emission spectrum of the emitter and the quadrupolar absorption spectrum of the charged host. The findings of this work are expected to have a broad relevance and to be useful in developing phosphorescent emitter-host combinations with reduced TPQ.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.10794 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a)). The small redshift of the whole spectrum can be attributed to the difference in the modeled em￾bedding between solution and thin film. The F¨orster radius calculated with Equation 1 from the overlap be￾tween the theoretical thin-film absorption spectrum of m-MTDATA+ and the experimental emission spectrum of Ir(ppy)2acac is within the uncertainty equal to that found in solution: RF = 2.7 nm. We thus conclude th… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Bauri, R

    J. Bauri, R. B. Choudhary, and G. Mandal, Recent ad- vances in efficient emissive materials-based OLED appli- cations: A review, Journal of Materials Science56, 18837 (2021)

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    G. Hong, X. Gan, C. Leonhardt, Z. Zhang, J. Seib- ert, J. M. Busch, and S. Br¨ ase, A Brief History of OLEDs—Emitter Development and Industry Milestones, Advanced Materials33, 2005630 (2021)

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    M. A. Baldo, D. F. O’Brien, Y. You, A. Shoustikov, S. Sibley, M. E. Thompson, and S. R. Forrest, Highly efficient phosphorescent emission from organic electrolu- minescent devices, Nature395, 151 (1998)

    work page 1998

  4. [4]

    Kawamura, K

    Y. Kawamura, K. Goushi, J. Brooks, J. J. Brown, H. Sasabe, and C. Adachi, 100% phosphorescence quan- tum efficiency of Ir(III) complexes in organic semicon- ductor films, Applied Physics Letters86, 071104 (2005)

    work page 2005

  5. [5]

    Murawski, K

    C. Murawski, K. Leo, and M. C. Gather, Efficiency Roll- Off in Organic Light-Emitting Diodes, Advanced Mate- rials25, 6801 (2013)

    work page 2013

  6. [6]

    N. C. Giebink, B. W. D’Andrade, M. S. Weaver, J. J. Brown, and S. R. Forrest, Direct evidence for degradation of polaron excited states in organic light emitting diodes, Journal of Applied Physics105, 124514 (2009)

    work page 2009

  7. [7]

    Y. J. Cho, Y. Zhang, H. Yu, and H. Aziz, The root causes of the limited stability of solution-coated small-molecule organic light-emitting devices: Faster host aggregation by exciton–polaron interactions, Advanced Functional Materials26, 8662 (2016)

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    Laaperi, OLED lifetime issues from a mobile-phone- industry point of view, Journal of the Society for Infor- mation Display16, 1125 (2008)

    A. Laaperi, OLED lifetime issues from a mobile-phone- industry point of view, Journal of the Society for Infor- mation Display16, 1125 (2008)

    work page 2008

Show all 71 references
  1. [9]

    Zhang and H

    Y. Zhang and H. Aziz, Degradation Mechanisms in Blue Phosphorescent Organic Light-Emitting Devices by Exciton–Polaron Interactions: Loss in Quantum Yield versus Loss in Charge Balance, ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces9, 636 (2017)

    2017

  2. [10]

    Wang, Q.-Y

    R. Wang, Q.-Y. Meng, Y.-L. Wang, and J. Qiao, Negative Charge Management to Make Fragile Bonds Less Frag- ile toward Electrons for Robust Organic Optoelectronic Materials, CCS Chemistry4, 331 (2021)

    2021

  3. [11]

    Kim, C.-H

    J.-M. Kim, C.-H. Lee, and J.-J. Kim, Mobility balance in the light-emitting layer governs the polaron accumulation and operational stability of organic light-emitting diodes, Applied Physics Letters111, 203301 (2017)

    2017

  4. [12]

    van Eersel, P

    H. van Eersel, P. A. Bobbert, R. a. J. Janssen, and R. Coehoorn, Monte Carlo study of efficiency roll-off of phosphorescent organic light-emitting diodes: Evidence for dominant role of triplet-polaron quenching, Applied Physics Letters105, 143303 (2014)

    2014

  5. [13]

    Regnat, K

    M. Regnat, K. P. Pernstich, and B. Ruhstaller, Influence of the bias-dependent emission zone on exciton quenching and OLED efficiency, Organic Electronics70, 219 (2019)

    2019

  6. [14]

    Reineke, K

    S. Reineke, K. Walzer, and K. Leo, Triplet-exciton quenching in organic phosphorescent light-emitting diodes with Ir-based emitters, Physical Review B75, 125328 (2007). 12

    2007

  7. [15]

    Wehrmeister, L

    S. Wehrmeister, L. J¨ ager, T. Wehlus, A. F. Rausch, T. C. G. Reusch, T. D. Schmidt, and W. Br¨ utting, Combined Electrical and Optical Analysis of the Ef- ficiency Roll-Off in Phosphorescent Organic Light- Emitting Diodes, Physical Review Applied3, 024008 (2015)

    2015

  8. [16]

    T. D. Schmidt, L. J¨ ager, Y. Noguchi, H. Ishii, and W. Br¨ utting, Analyzing degradation effects of organic light-emitting diodes via transient optical and electrical measurements, Journal of Applied Physics117, 215502 (2015)

    2015

  9. [17]

    Ligthart, T

    A. Ligthart, T. D. G. Nevels, C. H. L. Weijtens, P. A. Bobbert, and R. Coehoorn, Mechanistic description of the efficiency loss in organic phosphorescent host–guest systems due to triplet-polaron quenching, Organic Elec- tronics91, 106058 (2021)

    2021

  10. [18]

    K. Yang, D. Kwon, S. Nam, J. Kim, Y. S. Chung, H. Yoo, I. Park, Y. Park, J. W. Kim, and J. Lee, Interfa- cial exciton-polaron quenching in organic light-emitting diodes, Physical Review X14, 041009 (2024)

    2024

  11. [19]

    F¨ orster, Zwischenmolekulare Energiewanderung und Fluoreszenz, Annalen der Physik437, 55 (1948)

    Th. F¨ orster, Zwischenmolekulare Energiewanderung und Fluoreszenz, Annalen der Physik437, 55 (1948)

    1948

  12. [20]

    S. E. A. Jaspars, H. Tomita, C. van Hoesel, N. Daub, and R. A. J. Janssen, Spectro-electrochemical determination of F¨ orster radii for triplet-polaron quenching in phospho- rescent organic light-emitting diodes (2025), accepted

    2025

  13. [21]

    R. R¨ uger, AMS 2024 OLED Workflows, SCM, The- oretical Chemistry, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (2024),https://www.scm.com/doc/ Workflows/OLEDWorkflows/OLEDWorkflows.html

    2024

  14. [22]

    te Velde, F

    G. te Velde, F. M. Bickelhaupt, E. J. Baerends, C. Fon- seca Guerra, S. J. A. van Gisbergen, J. G. Snijders, and T. Ziegler, Chemistry with ADF, Journal of Computa- tional Chemistry22, 931 (2001)

    2001

  15. [23]

    C. C. Pye and T. Ziegler, An implementation of the conductor-like screening model of solvation within the Amsterdam density functional package, Theoretical Chemistry Accounts101, 396 (1999)

    1999

  16. [24]

    Ligthart, X

    A. Ligthart, X. de Vries, L. Zhang, M. C. W. M. Pols, P. A. Bobbert, H. van Eersel, and R. Coehoorn, Effect of Triplet Confinement on Triplet–Triplet Annihilation in Organic Phosphorescent Host–Guest Systems, Advanced Functional Materials28, 1804618 (2018)

    2018

  17. [25]

    See Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher] for the dipolar absorption spectra of the in- dividual conformers of the solution simulation and the dipolar and quadrupolar absorption spectra of the thin film simulation underlying Fig. 3

  18. [26]

    J. R. Rumble, T. J. Brunno, and M. J. Doa, eds.,CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics: A Ready-Reference Book of Chemical and Physical Data, 105th ed., CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics / Chemical Rubber Company No. 105th edition (2024) (CRC Press, Boca Raton London New Yo...

    2024

  19. [27]

    Graves, V

    D. Graves, V. Jankus, F. B. Dias, and A. Monkman, Photophysical investigation of the thermally activated delayed emission from films of m-MTDATA:PBD exci- plex, Advanced Functional Materials24, 2343 (2014)

    2014

  20. [28]

    Kawamura, J

    Y. Kawamura, J. Brooks, J. J. Brown, H. Sasabe, and C. Adachi, Intermolecular Interaction and a Concentration-Quenching Mechanism of Phosphorescent Ir(III) Complexes in a Solid Film, Physical Review Let- ters96, 017404 (2006)

    2006

  21. [29]

    K¨ ohler and H

    A. K¨ ohler and H. B¨ assler,Electronic Processes in Organic Semiconductors: An Introduction, 1st ed. (Wiley, 2015)

    2015

  22. [30]

    B. W. van der Meer, Kappa-squared: From nuisance to new sense, Journal of Biotechnology82, 181 (2002)

    2002

  23. [31]

    Lamansky, P

    S. Lamansky, P. Djurovich, D. Murphy, F. Abdel-Razzaq, R. Kwong, I. Tsyba, M. Bortz, B. Mui, R. Bau, and M. E. Thompson, Synthesis and Characterization of Phospho- rescent Cyclometalated Iridium Complexes, Inorganic Chemistry40, 1704 (2001)

    2001

  24. [32]

    Jensen, P

    L. Jensen, P. T. Van Duijnen, and J. G. Snijders, A dis- crete solvent reaction field model within density func- tional theory, Journal of Chemical Physics118, 514 (2003)

    2003

  25. [33]

    Sissa, A

    C. Sissa, A. K. Manna, F. Terenziani, A. Painelli, and S. K. Pati, Beyond the F¨ orster formulation for resonance energy transfer: The role of dark states, Physical Chem- istry Chemical Physics13, 12734 (2011)

    2011

  26. [34]

    A. D. Buckingham, Molecular quadrupole moments, Quarterly Reviews, Chemical Society13, 183 (1959)

    1959

  27. [35]

    Bernadotte, A

    S. Bernadotte, A. J. Atkins, and C. R. Jacob, Origin- independent calculation of quadrupole intensities in X- ray spectroscopy, Journal of Chemical Physics137, 204106 (2012)

    2012

  28. [36]

    Taherpour, C

    M. Taherpour, C. van Hoesel, R. Coehoorn, and P. A. Bobbert, Effects of correlations on triplet loss processes in organic phosphorescent emission layers: Accurate and fast master equation modeling, Physical Review B109, 165202 (2024)

    2024

  29. [37]

    Colbow, Energy transfer in photosynthesis, Biochim- ica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Bioenergetics314, 320 (1973)

    K. Colbow, Energy transfer in photosynthesis, Biochim- ica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Bioenergetics314, 320 (1973)

    1973

  30. [38]

    Fennel and S

    F. Fennel and S. Lochbrunner, F¨ orster-mediated spec- tral diffusion in disordered organic materials, Physical Review B85, 094203 (2012)

    2012

  31. [39]

    Vuojola, I

    J. Vuojola, I. Hypp¨ anen, M. Nummela, J. Kankare, and T. Soukka, Distance and Temperature Dependency in Nonoverlapping and Conventional F¨ orster Resonance Energy-Transfer, Journal of Physical Chemistry B115, 13685 (2011)

    2011

  32. [40]

    W. R. Ware, An Experimental Study of Energy Trans- fer between Unlike Molecules in Solution, Journal of the American Chemical Society83, 4374 (1961)

    1961

  33. [41]

    Stryer and R

    L. Stryer and R. P. Haugland, Energy transfer: A spec- troscopic ruler., Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences58, 719 (1967)

    1967

  34. [42]

    R. S. Roller,The determination of the forster critical ra- dius through time-dependent fluorescence decay measure- ments and the spectral overlap method, Ph.D. thesis, Uni- versity of Toronto, Toronto (2004),http://hdl.handle. net/1807/122611

    2004

  35. [43]

    A. J. Mork, M. C. Weidman, F. Prins, and W. A. Tisdale, Magnitude of the F¨ orster Radius in Colloidal Quantum Dot Solids, Journal of Physical Chemistry C118, 13920 (2014)

    2014

  36. [44]

    Margenau, The Role of Quadrupole Forces in Van Der Waals Attractions, Physical Review38, 747 (1931)

    H. Margenau, The Role of Quadrupole Forces in Van Der Waals Attractions, Physical Review38, 747 (1931)

    1931

  37. [45]

    J. E. Mayer, Dispersion and polarizability and the van der waals potential in the alkali halides, Journal of Chem- ical Physics1, 270 (1933)

    1933

  38. [46]

    K. T. Tang, J. M. Norbeck, and P. R. Certain, Upper and lower bounds of two- and three-body dipole, quadrupole, and octupole van der waals coefficients for hydrogen, no- ble gas, and alkali atom interactions, Journal of Chemical Physics64, 3063 (1976)

    1976

  39. [47]

    S. R. Hartmann and E. L. Hahn, Nuclear double reso- 13 nance in the rotating frame, Physical Review128, 2042 (1962)

    1962

  40. [48]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Generalized Gradient Approximation Made Simple, Physical Review Letters77, 3865 (1996)

    1996

  41. [49]

    Van Lenthe and E

    E. Van Lenthe and E. J. Baerends, Optimized Slater-type basis sets for the elements 1–118, Journal of Computa- tional Chemistry24, 1142 (2003)

    2003

  42. [50]

    D. S. Kleinerman, C. Czaplewski, A. Liwo, and H. A. Scheraga, Implementations of Nos´ e–Hoover and Nos´ e– Poincar´ e thermostats in mesoscopic dynamic simulations with the united-residue model of a polypeptide chain, Journal of Chemical Physics128, 245103 (2008)

    2008

  43. [51]

    S. J. A. van Gisbergen, J. G. Snijders, and E. J. Baerends, Implementation of time-dependent density functional re- sponse equations, Computer Physics Communications 118, 119 (1999)

    1999

  44. [52]

    Wang and T

    F. Wang and T. Ziegler, Excitation energies of some d1 systems calculated using time-dependent density functional theory: An implementation of open-shell TDDFT theory for doublet–doublet excitations, Molecu- lar Physics102, 2585 (2004)

    2004

  45. [53]

    Hirata and M

    S. Hirata and M. Head-Gordon, Time-dependent density functional theory within the tamm–dancoff approxima- tion, Chemical Physics Letters314, 291 (1999)

    1999

  46. [54]

    P. J. Stephens, F. J. Devlin, C. F. Chabalowski, and M. J. Frisch, Ab Initio Calculation of Vibrational Ab- sorption and Circular Dichroism Spectra Using Density Functional Force Fields, Journal of Physical Chemistry 98, 11623 (1994)

    1994

  47. [55]

    van Lenthe, E

    E. van Lenthe, E. J. Baerends, and J. G. Snijders, Rela- tivistic total energy using regular approximations, Jour- nal of Chemical Physics101, 9783 (1994)

    1994

  48. [56]

    Swart, P

    M. Swart, P. T. van Duijnen, and J. G. Snijders, A charge analysis derived from an atomic multipole expansion, Journal of Computational Chemistry22, 79 (2001)

    2001

  49. [57]

    A. K. Rappe, C. J. Casewit, K. S. Colwell, W. A. God- dard, and W. M. Skiff, UFF, a full periodic table force field for molecular mechanics and molecular dynamics simulations, Journal of the American Chemical Society 114, 10024 (1992)

    1992

  50. [58]

    M. A. Addicoat, N. Vankova, I. F. Akter, and T. Heine, Extension of the Universal Force Field to Metal–Organic Frameworks, Journal of Chemical Theory and Computa- tion10, 880 (2014)

    2014

  51. [59]

    D. E. Coupry, M. A. Addicoat, and T. Heine, Extension of the Universal Force Field for Metal–Organic Frame- works, Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation12, 5215 (2016)

    2016

  52. [60]

    G. J. Martyna, D. J. Tobias, and M. L. Klein, Con- stant pressure molecular dynamics algorithms, Journal of Chemical Physics101, 4177 (1994)

    1994

  53. [61]

    Q. Sun, T. C. Berkelbach, N. S. Blunt, G. H. Booth, S. Guo, Z. Li, J. Liu, J. D. McClain, E. R. Sayfut- yarova, S. Sharma, S. Wouters, and G. K.-L. Chan, PySCF: The Python-based simulations of chemistry framework, WIREs Computational Molecular Science8, e1340 (2018)

    2018

  54. [62]

    Q. Sun, X. Zhang, S. Banerjee, P. Bao, M. Barbry, N. S. Blunt, N. A. Bogdanov, G. H. Booth, J. Chen, Z.-H. Cui, J. J. Eriksen, Y. Gao, S. Guo, J. Hermann, M. R. Hermes, K. Koh, P. Koval, S. Lehtola, Z. Li, J. Liu, N. Mardirossian, J. D. McClain, M. Motta, B. Mussard, H. Q. Pha...

    2020

  55. [63]

    Hellweg and D

    A. Hellweg and D. Rappoport, Development of new aux- iliary basis functions of the karlsruhe segmented con- tracted basis sets including diffuse basis functions (def2- SVPD, def2-TZVPPD, and def2-QVPPD) for RI-MP2 and RI-CC calculations, Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics17, ...

    2014

  56. [64]

    Wang and T

    F. Wang and T. Ziegler, A simplified relativistic time- dependent density-functional theory formalism for the calculations of excitation energies including spin-orbit coupling effect, Journal of Chemical Physics123, 154102 (2005)

    2005

  57. [65]

    de Souza, F

    B. de Souza, F. Neese, and R. Izs´ ak, On the theoretical prediction of fluorescence rates from first principles using the path integral approach, Journal of Chemical Physics 148, 034104 (2018)

    2018

  58. [66]

    de Vries, R

    X. de Vries, R. Coehoorn, and P. A. Bobbert, High energy acceptor states strongly enhance exciton transfer between metal organic phosphorescent dyes, Nature Communica- tions11, 1292 (2020)

    2020

  59. [67]

    M. Seth, G. Mazur, and T. Ziegler, Time-dependent den- sity functional theory gradients in the amsterdam density functional package: Geometry optimizations of spin-flip excitations, Theoretical Chemistry Accounts129, 331 (2011)

    2011

  60. [68]

    de Vries, P

    X. de Vries, P. Friederich, W. Wenzel, R. Coehoorn, and P. A. Bobbert, Full quantum treatment of charge dynam- ics in amorphous molecular semiconductors, Physical Re- view B97, 075203 (2018)

    2018

  61. [69]

    Wehner and B

    J. Wehner and B. Baumeier, Intermolecular Singlet and Triplet Exciton Transfer Integrals from Many-Body Green’s Functions Theory, Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation13, 1584 (2017)

    2017

  62. [70]

    van Hoesel, R

    C. van Hoesel, R. Coehoorn, and P. A. Bob- bert, Data underlying the publication: Dominance of dipole-quadrupole coupling in triplet exciton-polaron quenching in a phosphorescent oled emission layer, 4TU.ResearchData (2025)

    2025

  63. [71]

    van Hoesel, R

    C. van Hoesel, R. Coehoorn, and P. Bobbert, Dipole- quadrupole coupling in triplet exciton-polaron quench- ing in a phosphorescent OLED emission layer, Physical Review B111, 224204 (2025). 14 Si. SPECTRA OF INDIVIDUAL CONFORMERS Figures S1, S2 and S3 show the spectra as a func...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.