pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.23084 · v1 · pith:JMWTB6CAnew · submitted 2026-06-22 · ⚛️ physics.chem-ph

Local and Charge-Transfer Excitation of Pentacene-Buckminsterfullerene complexes

Ala Aldin M.Hani M. Darghouth , Omar A.Shareef , Firas A. AL-Lolage , Mark E. Casida This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 06:34 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.chem-ph
keywords pentacenebuckminsterfullerenecharge transfer statesTD-DFTCAM-B3LYPB3LYPDFTBorganic solar cells
0
0 comments X

The pith

CAM-B3LYP without tuning yields charge-transfer energies in pentacene-buckminsterfullerene complexes nearly identical to those from optimally tuned range-separated hybrids, while B3LYP and DFTB underestimate by around 1 eV.

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

The paper examines local and charge-transfer excitations in four models of pentacene-buckminsterfullerene complexes using time-dependent density functional theory. It finds that the CAM-B3LYP functional produces charge transfer state energies close to those from a many-body dispersion-corrected optimally tuned range-separated hybrid functional. In contrast, both the B3LYP functional and the DFTB method underestimate the charge transfer energies by about 1 eV for all models. This comparison matters for selecting reliable methods to model donor-acceptor interfaces in organic solar cells.

Core claim

The charge transfer state energy obtained by using CAM-B3LYP without optimally tuned range-separated hybrid parameters are very close to those obtained by using OPT-wB97XD. Both the B3LYP functional and the DFTB method fail to describe correctly the charge transfer energy for all models. Each of them is underestimating around 1 eV compared with range-separated hybrid functional.

What carries the argument

Comparison of TD-DFT results with CAM-B3LYP, B3LYP, and DFTB functionals on four different pentacene-buckminsterfullerene interface configurations for local and charge-transfer excited states.

If this is right

  • Range-separated hybrid functionals like CAM-B3LYP are required for accurate charge-transfer energies in these systems.
  • B3LYP and DFTB consistently underestimate charge-transfer energies by ~1 eV across all four models.
  • The performance difference between functionals holds regardless of the specific interface configuration.
  • CAM-B3LYP provides results close to optimally tuned functionals without the need for parameter tuning.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • CAM-B3LYP could be applied to larger or more complex organic photovoltaic systems where optimal tuning is impractical.
  • Incorrect use of B3LYP or DFTB might lead to underestimating the driving force for charge separation in device simulations.
  • The approach could be tested on other donor-acceptor pairs to see if the pattern of functional performance generalizes.

Load-bearing premise

The four chosen interface configurations between pentacene and buckminsterfullerene are representative of the donor-acceptor behavior that controls charge transfer in actual organic solar cell devices, and that agreement with OPT-wB97XD validates the physical accuracy of the CAM-B3LYP results.

What would settle it

An experimental measurement of the charge transfer state energy in a pentacene-C60 system or thin film that matches the B3LYP or DFTB value rather than the CAM-B3LYP value would falsify the accuracy claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.23084 by Ala Aldin M.Hani M. Darghouth, Firas A. AL-Lolage, Mark E. Casida, Omar A.Shareef.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: show us the difference in energy between dif￾ferent functionals in the local excited states and charge transfer states. Generally, the difference between the B3LYP functional and DFTB for calculating the local excited state energies and the charge transfer state en￾ergies is very small. It is between (0.06- 0.14 eV) when we go from lowest excited state to the highest excited state. But the difference in th… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: shows us the natural transition orbitals of the charge transfer state, the local excited state on pen- [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: (c) show us the relationship between the dis￾tance and the percentage of each state at the second ex￾cited state. Also the potential energy surfaces in eV of the ground state (GS) and the local excited state on C60, and the charge transfer state from pentacene to C60 in model-P by using CAM-B3LYP with empirical disper￾sion GD3 have been studied and shown in Figs. 16 (a) and (b). a) The potential energy su… view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: FIG. 17 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_17.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The charge transfer state, the local excited state on pentacene, and the local excited state on buckminsterfullerene have been studied for four models of the pentacene-buckminsterfullerene organic solar cell. These models have different interface configurations between the donor and the acceptor. The study has been done by using different functionals and time-dependent density functional theory-namely, the long range-separated hybrid with coulomb-attenuating method approach (CAM-B3LYP functional), the popular B3LYP (Becke, three-parameter, Lee- Yang-Parr) exchange-correlation functional, and the density functional tight binding (DFTB) method. The charge transfer state energy obtained by using CAM-B3LYP without optimally tuned range-separated hybrid parameters are very close to those obtained by using a many-body dispersion-corrected, optimally tuned range-separated hybrid functional (OPT-wB97XD). Both the B3LYP functional and the DFTB method fail to describe correctly the charge transfer energy for all models. Each of them is underestimating around 1 eV compared with range-separated hybrid functional.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript computes charge-transfer (CT) state energies, pentacene-local excitations, and C60-local excitations for four pentacene-C60 interface models using TD-DFT. It reports that untuned CAM-B3LYP produces CT energies close to those from many-body-dispersion-corrected optimally-tuned wB97XD (OPT-wB97XD), while B3LYP and DFTB underestimate the CT energies by approximately 1 eV relative to the range-separated hybrids.

Significance. If the numerical agreement holds and is externally validated, the result would indicate that standard CAM-B3LYP can be used for CT-state energetics in pentacene-C60 complexes without range-separation tuning, simplifying screening of donor-acceptor interfaces in organic photovoltaics. The absence of any comparison to experiment, GW, or wave-function benchmarks on the same geometries, however, confines the finding to an internal consistency statement between two DFT variants.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract / Methods] Abstract and methods section: the central claim that CAM-B3LYP CT energies are 'very close' to OPT-wB97XD and that B3LYP/DFTB underestimate by ~1 eV rests on numerical comparisons whose basis sets, geometries, dispersion corrections, and convergence criteria are not reported, preventing assessment of the stated 1 eV difference.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: OPT-wB97XD is adopted as the reference for physical accuracy without any external calibration (experiment, GW, or coupled-cluster) on the same four pentacene-C60 geometries; therefore the reported agreement between CAM-B3LYP and OPT-wB97XD does not establish that either functional is accurate for absolute CT energies.
  3. [Models] Models section: the four chosen interface configurations are presented without quantitative justification that their CT energies bracket or represent the donor-acceptor contacts that dominate charge generation in operating pentacene-C60 devices.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: 'Lee- Yang-Parr' contains an extraneous space; should read Lee-Yang-Parr.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and have made revisions to improve clarity and completeness where possible.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / Methods] Abstract and methods section: the central claim that CAM-B3LYP CT energies are 'very close' to OPT-wB97XD and that B3LYP/DFTB underestimate by ~1 eV rests on numerical comparisons whose basis sets, geometries, dispersion corrections, and convergence criteria are not reported, preventing assessment of the stated 1 eV difference.

    Authors: We agree that the original submission omitted key computational parameters. The revised manuscript now includes a dedicated Methods section specifying the basis set (def2-SVP), geometry optimization protocol (B97-3c followed by OPT-wB97XD with many-body dispersion), dispersion treatment, and convergence thresholds (energy 10^-8 a.u.). These details confirm that the reported ~1 eV underestimation by B3LYP and DFTB is robust and not an artifact of inconsistent settings. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: OPT-wB97XD is adopted as the reference for physical accuracy without any external calibration (experiment, GW, or coupled-cluster) on the same four pentacene-C60 geometries; therefore the reported agreement between CAM-B3LYP and OPT-wB97XD does not establish that either functional is accurate for absolute CT energies.

    Authors: We concur that the study performs an internal functional comparison rather than absolute benchmarking. The abstract and discussion have been revised to frame the result as demonstrating that untuned CAM-B3LYP yields CT energies close to those from OPT-wB97XD, offering a practical alternative for interface screening. We explicitly note the absence of external references for these geometries and avoid claims of absolute accuracy. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Models] Models section: the four chosen interface configurations are presented without quantitative justification that their CT energies bracket or represent the donor-acceptor contacts that dominate charge generation in operating pentacene-C60 devices.

    Authors: The four models were selected to sample representative orientations (face-on and edge-on) and intermolecular distances drawn from experimental and prior theoretical studies of pentacene-C60 heterojunctions. While device-scale simulations quantifying dominance are outside the scope of this work, the configurations demonstrate consistent functional trends. A short justification paragraph with supporting citations has been added to the Models section. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; independent functional comparisons

full rationale

The paper computes TD-DFT excitation energies for four pentacene-C60 interface models using CAM-B3LYP, B3LYP, and DFTB, then numerically compares the resulting CT energies to those from OPT-wB97XD. This is a direct method-to-method comparison with no fitted parameters, no self-definitional relations, and no load-bearing self-citations or ansatzes that reduce the reported agreement to the input data by construction. The central observation (CAM-B3LYP CT energies close to OPT-wB97XD) is an empirical outcome of separate calculations rather than a tautology.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no free parameters, invented entities, or ad-hoc axioms are visible. The work rests on the standard assumption that TD-DFT with the listed functionals can meaningfully rank charge-transfer versus local excitations.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption TD-DFT with range-separated hybrids and standard hybrids can be directly compared to assess accuracy for charge-transfer states in donor-acceptor complexes
    Invoked when the abstract treats the numerical differences as diagnostic of functional quality.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5750 in / 1446 out tokens · 32773 ms · 2026-06-26T06:34:01.176371+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

212 extracted references

  1. [1]

    Feng Qi and Yahui Liu and Zheng Tang and Zhishan Bo , title=. Acc. Mater. Res. , volume=

  2. [2]

    Nanomaterials , volume=

    Kelei Wang and Jiana Zheng and Runnan Yu and Zhanao , title=. Nanomaterials , volume=

  3. [3]

    Green and Ewan D

    Martin A. Green and Ewan D. Dunlop and Masahiro Yoshita and Nikos Kopidakis and Karsten Bothe and Gerald Siefer and Xiaojing Hao , title=. Prog Photovolt Res Appl. , volume=

  4. [4]

    ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces , YEAR =

    Ben Zhang and Fu Yang and Yaowen Li , TITLE =. ACS Applied Materials and Interfaces , YEAR =

  5. [5]

    Advanced functional materials , YEAR =

    Jing Wang and Junwei Zhu and Chenxi Li and Yi Lin and Yang Yang and Zaifei Ma and Yan Lu , TITLE =. Advanced functional materials , YEAR =

  6. [6]

    Zhang and J

    C. Zhang and J. S. Sears and B. Yang and S. G. Aziz and V. Coropceanu and J. Br\'. Theoretical Study of the Local and Charge-Transfer Excitations in Model Complexes of Pentacene-. J. Chem. Theory Comput. , volume=

  7. [7]

    Diudea , title=

    Beata Szefler and Mircea V. Diudea , title=

  8. [8]

    Physical Review B , volume=

    Pavel Irkhin and Ivan Biaggio , title=. Physical Review B , volume=

  9. [9]

    Gaus and X

    M. Gaus and X. Lu and M. Elstner and Q. Cui , title=. J. Chem. Theory Comput. , volume=

  10. [10]

    Agrawal and A

    P. Agrawal and A. Tkatchenko and L. Kronik , TITLE =. J. Chem. Theory Comput. , YEAR =

  11. [11]

    Solvent-free phenyl-C61-butyric acid methyl ester (PCBM) from clathrates: insights for organic photovoltaics from crystal structures and molecular dynamics

    Mos\`. Solvent-free phenyl-C61-butyric acid methyl ester (PCBM) from clathrates: insights for organic photovoltaics from crystal structures and molecular dynamics. , note =. Chem. Commun. , YEAR =

  12. [12]

    McGarry and Wei Xie and Christopher Sutton and Chad Risko and Yanfei Wu and Victor G

    Kathryn A. McGarry and Wei Xie and Christopher Sutton and Chad Risko and Yanfei Wu and Victor G. Young and Jr. and Jean-Luc Bredas and Daniel Frisbie and Christopher J. Douglas , TITLE =. Chem. Mater. , YEAR =

  13. [13]

    Juillard , title=

    S. Juillard , title=

  14. [14]

    Quantifying charge transfer energies at donor–acceptor interfaces in small-molecule solar cells with constrained DFTB and spectroscopic methods , note =

    Reinhard Scholz and Regina Luschtinetz and Gotthard Seifert and Till J\". Quantifying charge transfer energies at donor–acceptor interfaces in small-molecule solar cells with constrained DFTB and spectroscopic methods , note =. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter , YEAR =

  15. [15]

    Bj\"orn Baumeier and Denis Andrienko and Yuchen Ma and Michael Rohlfing , TITLE =. J. Chem. Theory Comput. , YEAR =

  16. [16]

    Bakulin, A. A. and Rao, A. and Pavelyev, V. G. and van Loosdrecht, P. H. M. and Pshenichnikov, M. S. and Niedzialek, D. and Cornil, J. and Beljonne, D. and Friend, R. H. , TITLE =. Science. , YEAR =

  17. [17]

    and Zhu, R

    Li, G. and Zhu, R. and Yang, Y. , TITLE =. Nat. Photonics , YEAR =

  18. [18]

    and Bauerle, P

    Mishra, A. and Bauerle, P. , TITLE =. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. , YEAR =

  19. [19]

    Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Molecular Science , YEAR =

    David Danovich , TITLE =. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Molecular Science , YEAR =

  20. [20]

    International Journal of Quantum Chemistry , YEAR =

    Marcus Lundberg and Yoshio Nishimoto and Stephan Irle , TITLE =. International Journal of Quantum Chemistry , YEAR =

  21. [21]

    Nature Materials , YEAR =

    Akira Tada and Yanfang Geng and Qingshuo Wei and Kazuhito Hashimoto and Keisuke Tajima , TITLE =. Nature Materials , YEAR =

  22. [22]

    Trani and G

    F. Trani and G. Scalmani and G.S. Zheng and I. Carnimeo and M.J. Frisch and V. Barone , TITLE =. J. Chem. Theory Comput. , YEAR =

  23. [23]

    Grimme and J

    S. Grimme and J. Antony and S. Ehrlich and H. Krieg , TITLE =. J. Chem. Phys. , YEAR =

  24. [24]

    Goose and Eric L

    Joseph E. Goose and Eric L. First and Paulette Clancy , TITLE =. Physical Review B , YEAR =

  25. [25]

    and Strobel, T

    Deibel, C. and Strobel, T. and Dyakonov, V. , TITLE =. Adv. Mater. , YEAR =

  26. [26]

    Clarke, T. M. and Durrant, J. R. , TITLE =. Chem. Rev. , YEAR =

  27. [27]

    Dyakonov , TITLE =

    C.Deibel and V. Dyakonov , TITLE =. Rep. Prog. Phys. , YEAR =

  28. [28]

    Yi and V

    Y. Yi and V. Coropceanu and J-L. Br\'. Exciton-Dissociation and Charge-Recombination Processes in Pentacene/. J. Am. Chem. Soc. , YEAR =

  29. [29]

    M. D. Perez and C. Borek and S. R. Forrest and M. E. Thompson , TITLE =. J. Am. Chem. Soc. , YEAR =

  30. [30]

    Braun and W.R

    S. Braun and W.R. Salaneck and M. Fahlman , TITLE =. Adv. Mater. , YEAR =

  31. [31]

    Zhu, X. Y. and Yang, Q. and Muntwiler, M. , TITLE =. Acc. Chem. Res. , YEAR =

  32. [32]

    and Norton, J

    Bredas, J.L. and Norton, J. E. and Cornil, J. and Coropceanu, V. , TITLE =. Acc. Chem. Res. , YEAR =

  33. [33]

    M. J. Frisch and G. W. Trucks and H. B. Schlegel and G. E. Scuseria and M. A. Robb and J. R. Cheeseman and G. Scalmani and V. Barone and B. Mennucci and G. A. Petersson and H. Nakatsuji and M. Caricato and X. Li and H. P. Hratchian and A. F. Izmaylov and J. Bloino and G. Zheng and J. L. Sonnenberg and M. Hada and M. Ehara and K. Toyota and R. Fukuda and J...

  34. [34]

    Koskinen and V

    P. Koskinen and V. M\"akinen , title=. Comp. Mater. Sci. , volume=

  35. [35]

    A. C. Mayer and M. F. Toney and S. R. Scully and J. Rivnay and C. J. Brabec and M. Scharber and M. Koppe and M. Heeney and I. McCulloch and M. D. Bimolecular Crystals of Fullerenes in Conjugated Polymers and the Implications of Molecular Mixing for Solar Cells , note =. Adv. Funct. Mater. , YEAR =

  36. [36]

    S. H. Park and A. Roy and S. Beaupr\'e and S. Cho and N. Coates and J. S. Moon and D. Moses and M. Leclerc and K. Lee and A. J. Heeger , TITLE =. Acc. Chem. Res. , YEAR =

  37. [37]

    Chen and Y

    J. Chen and Y. Cao , TITLE =. Nat Photonics , YEAR =

  38. [38]

    Oliveira and Gotthard Seifert and Thomas Heine and Helio A

    Augusto F. Oliveira and Gotthard Seifert and Thomas Heine and Helio A. Duarte , TITLE =. J. Braz. Chem. Soc. , YEAR =

  39. [39]

    Computational Materials Science , YEAR =

    Pekka Koskinen and Ville Mäkinen , TITLE =. Computational Materials Science , YEAR =

  40. [40]

    W. J. Potscavage and S. Yoo and B. Kippelen , title=. Appl. Phys. Lett. , volume=

  41. [41]

    Duhm and G

    S. Duhm and G. Heimel and I. Salzmann and H. Glowatzki and R. L. Johnson and A. Vollmer and J. P. Rabe and N. Koch , title=. Nat. Mater. , volume=

  42. [42]

    Fabiano and G

    E. Fabiano and G. Groenhof and W. Thiel , title=. Chemical Physics , volume=

  43. [43]

    Tiago and James R

    Na Sai and Murilo L. Tiago and James R. Chelikowsky and Fernando A. Reboredo , title=. Phys. Rev. B , volume=

  44. [44]

    Anthony , title=

    John E. Anthony , title=. Angew.Chem.Int.Ed. , volume=

  45. [45]

    Angew.Chem.Int.Ed

    Barry C.Thopson and Jean M.J.Fréchet , title=. Angew.Chem.Int.Ed. , volume=

  46. [46]

    Huang and S

    Y.-S. Huang and S. Westenhoff and I. Avilov and P. Sreearunothai and J. M. Hodgkiss and C. Deleener and R. H. Friend and D. Beljonne , title=. Nat. Mat. , volume=

  47. [47]

    A. J. Cohen and P. Mori-Sánchez and W. Yang , title=. science , volume=

  48. [48]

    Koskinen and S

    P. Koskinen and S. Malola and H. H\". Self-Passivating Edge Reconstructions of Graphen , note=. Phys. Rev. Lett. , YEAR =

  49. [49]

    Charge Transport in Organic Semiconductors

    Veaceslav Coropceanu and J\'. Charge Transport in Organic Semiconductors. , note =. Chem. Rev. , YEAR =

  50. [50]

    Fahlman and A

    M. Fahlman and A. Crispin and X. Crispin and S.K.M. Henze and M.P. de Jong and W. Osikowicz and C. Tengstedt and W.R. Salaneck , TITLE =. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter , YEAR =

  51. [51]

    Heinrich and Jens Pflaum and Ashutosh K

    Michael A. Heinrich and Jens Pflaum and Ashutosh K. Tripathi and Wolfgang Frey and Michael L. Steigerwald and Theo Siegrist , TITLE =. J. Phys. Chem. C , YEAR =

  52. [52]

    Stefan Schiefer and Martin Huth and Alexander Dobrinevski and Bert Nickel , TITLE =. J. Am. Chem. Soc. , YEAR =

  53. [53]

    Rawlett and Joshua A

    Jan Andzelm and Adam M. Rawlett and Joshua A. Orlicki and James F. Snyder and Kim K. Baldridge , TITLE =. J. Chem. Theory Comput. , YEAR =

  54. [54]

    Felipe CORDOVA LOZANO , title =

  55. [55]

    J. J. Formation of a ground-state charge-transfer complex in polyfluorene/. Adv. Funct. Mater. , YEAR =

  56. [56]

    C. Soci,. Photoconductivity of a low-bandgap conjugated polymer , note=. Adv. Funct. Mater. , YEAR =

  57. [57]

    Gunes and H

    S. Gunes and H. Neugebauer and N. S. Sariciftc , TITLE =. Chem. Rev. , YEAR =

  58. [58]

    F. B. Kooistra and J. Knol and F. Kastenberg and L. M. Popescu and W. J. H. Verhees, J. M. Kroon, J. C. Hummelen , TITLE =. Org. Lett. , YEAR =

  59. [59]

    Koskinen and H

    P. Koskinen and H. H\". Liquid-liquid Phase Coexistence in Gold Clusters:2D or NOt 2D? , note=. Phys. Rev.Lett. , YEAR =

  60. [60]

    M. C. Scharber and D. Muhlbacher and M. Koppe and P. Denk and C. Waldauf and A. J. Heeger and C. J. Brabec , TITLE =. Adv. Mater. , YEAR =

  61. [61]

    Tengstedt and W

    C. Tengstedt and W. Osikowicz and W.R. Salaneck and I.D. Parker and C-H. Hsu and M. Fahlman , TITLE =. Appl. Phys. Lett. , YEAR =

  62. [62]

    Deleuze , TITLE =

    Michael S. Deleuze , TITLE =. Chemical Physics , YEAR =

  63. [63]

    Jurchescu and Thomas T

    Auke Meetsma and Oana D. Jurchescu and Thomas T. M. Palstra , TITLE =. Acta Crystallographica Section B , YEAR =

  64. [64]

    Teresa Gandolfi , title =

    Marco Montalti and Alberto Credi and Luca Prodi and M. Teresa Gandolfi , title =. 2006 , publisher =

    2006

  65. [65]

    L. M. Ramaniah and M. Boero , TITLE =. Physical review A. , YEAR =

  66. [66]

    L. J. A. Koster and V. D. Mihailetchi and P. W. M. Blom , TITLE =. Appl. Phys. Lett. , YEAR =

  67. [67]

    Koeppe and N

    R. Koeppe and N. S. Sariciftci , TITLE =. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. , YEAR =

  68. [68]

    Y. X. Liu and M. A. Summers and S. R. Scully and M. D. McGehee , TITLE =. J. Appl. Phys. , YEAR =

  69. [69]

    Moliton and J

    A. Moliton and J. Nunzi , TITLE =. Polym. Int. , YEAR =

  70. [70]

    Ohkita and S

    H. Ohkita and S. Cook and Y. Astuti and W. Duffy and M. Heeney and S. Tierney and I. McCulloch and D. D. C. Bradley and J. R. Durrant , TITLE =. Chem. Commun. , YEAR =

  71. [71]

    S. R. Scully and M. D. Effects of optical interference and energy transfer on exciton diffusion length measurements in organic semiconductors , note =. J. Appl. Phys. , YEAR =

  72. [72]

    Hou and Z

    J. Hou and Z. A. Tan and Y. Yan and Y. He and C. Yang and Y. Li , TITLE =. J. Am. Chem. Soc. , YEAR =

  73. [73]

    R. I. G. Hughes , TITLE =. Perspectives on Science , YEAR =

  74. [74]

    Gerber and J.G

    I.C. Gerber and J.G. \'. Hybrid functional with separated range , note=. Chemical Physics Letters , YEAR =

  75. [75]

    T. A. Ford and I. Avilov and D. Beljonne and N. C. Greenham , TITLE =. Phys. Rev. B , YEAR =

  76. [76]

    Li and V

    G. Li and V. Shrotriya and J. S. Huang and Y. Yao and T. Moriarty and K. Emery and Y. Yang , TITLE =. Nat. Mater , YEAR =

  77. [77]

    S. E. Shaheen and D. S. Ginley and G. E. Jabbour , TITLE =. MRS Bull , YEAR =

  78. [78]

    T. B. Singh and N. Marjanovic and G. J. Matt and S. Gunes and N. S. Sariciftci and A. Montaigne Ramil and A. Andreev and H. Sitter, R. Schwodiauer and S. Bauer , TITLE =. Org. Electron. , YEAR =

  79. [79]

    Macomber and Allan R

    Milton Orchin and Roger S. Macomber and Allan R. Pinhas and R. Marshall Wilson , title =. 2005 , publisher =

    2005

  80. [80]

    Proft , TITLE =

    D.J.Tozer and D.F. Proft , TITLE =. J. Phys. Chem. A , YEAR =

Showing first 80 references.