Article
Inorganic Chemistry, Vol. 48, No. 23, 2009 10929
energy have been previously described.20 All samples were
measured at room temperature as fluorescence spectra using a
Lytle detector. Samples were ground finely and dispersed as
thinly as possible on Mylar tape to minimize the possibility
of fluorescence saturation effects or run in dichloromethane
solutions of ∼2 mM concentration. Data represent 2-3 scan
averages. All samples were monitored for photoreduction
throughout the course of data collection. The S K-edge energy
optimizations were carried out using the B3LYP functional.24
A segmented all-electron relativistically contracted basis set of
triple-ζ-quality (TZVP) was used for rhenium.25 A scalar rela-
tivistic correction was applied using the zeroth-order regular
approximation (ZORA) method.26 In the context of ZORA, a
one-center approximation has been shown to introduce only
minor errors to the final geometries.26b An all-electron polarized
triple-ζ-quality (TZVP) basis set of Ahlrich’s group was used for
sulfur.27 The remaining atoms were described by slightly smaller
polarized split-valence SV(P) basis sets that are double-ζ-quality
in the valence region and contain a polarizing set of d functions
for the non-hydrogen atoms.27c Auxiliary basis sets for all
complexes used to expand the electron density in the calcula-
tions were chosen to match the orbital basis. The self-consistent
field calculations were tightly converged (1 ꢀ 10-8 Eh in energy,
1 ꢀ 10-7 Eh in the density change, and 1 ꢀ 10-7 in the maximum
element of the DIIS28 error vector). The geometry search for all
complexes was carried out in redundant internal coordinates
without imposing geometry constraints. The coordinates for
the sequentially (∼3.5°) twisted molecules for the [Re(bdt)3]z
(z = 1+, 0, 1-, 2-) were generated with the Z-matrix editor in
Molden.29 A broken symmetry BS(1,1) state was calculated
for [Re(bdt)3]+ using the method of Noodleman and co-
workers.12,30 We adopted the following notation: The given
system was divided into two fragments. The notation BS(m,n)
refers then to a broken symmetry state with m unpaired R-spin
electrons essentially on fragment 1 and n unpaired β-spin
electrons localized on fragment 2. In most cases, fragments
1 and 2 correspond to the metal and the ligands, respectively.
In this notation, the standard high-spin, open-shell solution is
written as BS(m + n,0). The BS(m,n) notation refers to
the initial guess of the wave function. The variational process
does, however, have the freedom to converge to a solution of
the form BS(m - n,0) in which effectively the n β-spin
electrons pair up with n < m R-spin electrons on the
was calibrated using the S K-edge spectra of Na2S2O3 5H2O,
3
run at intervals between sample scans. The maximum of the first
pre-edge feature in the spectrum was fixed at 2472.02 eV. A step
size of 0.08 eV was used over the edge region. Data were
averaged, and a smooth background was removed from all
spectra by fitting a polynomial to the pre-edge region and
subtracting this polynomial from the entire spectrum. Normal-
ization of the data was accomplished by fitting a flattened
polynomial or straight line to the postedge region and normal-
izing the postedge to 1.0.
Re L-edge XAS data were measured using the focused 16-pole
wiggler beamline 9-3. A Si(220) monochromator was utilized for
energy selection, and a harmonic rejection mirror was present to
minimize higher harmonic components in the X-ray beam. The
solid samples were prepared as a dilute matrix in boron nitride,
pressed into a pellet, and sealed between 38 μm Kapton tape
windows in a 1 mm aluminum spacer. The sample of 3d was
prepared by controlled potential coulometry at -25 °C in a
dichloromethane solution containing 0.10 M [N(n-Bu)4]PF6.
Samples were maintained at 10 K during data collection by
using an Oxford Instruments CF1208 continuous flow liquid
helium cryostat. Data were measured in the transmission mode.
Internal energy calibrations were performed by simultaneous
measurement of the Re reference foil placed between a second
and third ionization chamber with inflection points assigned as
12 527, 11 959, and 10 535 eV for the L1-, L2-, and L3-edges,
respectively. Data represent 2-4 scan averages and were pro-
cessed by fitting a second-order polynomial to the pre-edge
region and subtracting this background from the entire spec-
trum. A three-region cubic spline was used to model the smooth
background above the edge. The data were normalized by
subtracting the spline and normalizing the postedge to 1.0. Fits
to the pre-edges modeled by pseudo-Voigt lines were carried out
using the program EDG_FIT21 with a fixed 1:1 ratio of Lor-
entzian to Gaussian contributions.
partner fragment. Such a solution is then a standard MS
=
(m - n)/2 spin-unrestricted Kohn-Sham solution. As ex-
plained elsewhere,31 the nature of the solution is investigated
from the corresponding orbital transformation, which, from
the corresponding orbital overlaps, displays whether the
system should be described as a spin-coupled or a closed-shell
solution. Single point energies were run using the same
conditions detailed for the optimization. Canonical orbitals
and density plots were constructed using the program
Molekel.32
Time-dependent (TD-DFT) calculations of the sulfur K-pre-
edges using the BP86 functional were conducted as previously
described.15,33 A single point, spin-unrestricted ground state
DFT calculation, starting from the optimized coordinates
and using the same basis sets described above, was performed.
Other Physical Measurements. Cyclic voltammograms (CVs)
and coulometric measurements were performed with an EG&G
potentiostat/galvanostat. Electronic absorption spectra from
the spectroelectrochemical measurements were obtained on a
Hewlett-Packard 8453 diode-array spectrophotometer (range
200-1100 nm). X-band EPR spectra were recorded with a
Bruker ESP 300 spectrometer. The spectra were simulated on
the basis of a spin-Hamiltonian description of the electronic
ground state with S = 1/2:
(25) Pantazis, D. A.; Chen, X.-Y.; Landis, C. R.; Neese, F. J. Chem.
Theory Comput. 2008, 4, 908.
!^ !^
!^ !^ !^
(26) (a) van Lenthe, E.; Snijders, J. G.; Baerends, E. J. J. Chem. Phys.
1996, 105, 6505. (b) van Lenthe, E.; Faas, S.; Snijders, J. G. Chem. Phys. Lett.
2000, 328, 107. (c) van Lenthe, E.; van der Avoird, A.; Wormer, P. E. S. J. Chem.
Phys. 1998, 98, 5648.
ꢁ
H ¼ μBBB g S þ S A I þ I P I
3
3
3
3
3
3
by using the simulation package XSOPHE.22
Calculations. All calculations in this work were performed
(27) (a) Ahlrichs, R.; May, K. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2000, 2, 943. (b)
::
::
with the electronic structure program ORCA.23 Geometry
Schafer, A.; Horn, H.; Ahlrichs, R. J. Chem. Phys. 1992, 97, 2571. (c) Schafer,
A.; Huber, C.; Ahlrichs, R. J. Chem. Phys. 1994, 100, 5829.
(28) (a) Pulay, P. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1980, 73, 393. (b) Pulay, P. J. Comput.
Chem. 1992, 3, 556.
(20) Hedman, B.; Frank, P.; Gheller, S. F.; Roe, A. L.; Newton, W. E.;
Hodgson, K. O. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1988, 110, 3798.
(21) George, G. N. EXAFSPAK & EDG_FIT; Stanford Synchrotron
Radiation Lightsource, Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford University:
Palo Alto, CA, 2000.
(22) Hanson, G. R.; Gates, K. E.; Noble, C. J.; Griffin, M.; Mitchell, A.;
Benson, S. J. Inorg. Biochem. 2004, 98, 903.
(23) Neese, F. Orca, version 2.6, revision 35; Universitat Bonn: Bonn,
(29) Schaftenaar, G.; Noordik, J. H. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2000, 14,
123.
(30) Noodleman, L.; Peng, C. Y.; Case, D. A.; Monesca, J. M. Coord.
Chem. Rev. 1995, 144, 199.
(31) Neese, F. J. Phys. Chem. Solids 2004, 65, 781.
(32) Molekel, Advanced Interactive 3D-Graphics for Molecular Sciences,
September 2009)
::
Germany, 2008.
(24) (a) Becke, A. D. J. Chem. Phys. 1993, 98, 5648. (b) Lee, C. T.; Yang,
W. T.; Parr, R. G. Phys. Rev. B 1988, 37, 785.
(33) DeBeer George, S.; Petrenko, T.; Neese, F. Inorg. Chim. Acta 2008,
361, 965.