Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 267

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

1,8-Naphthalimides in Phosphorescent Organic LEDs: The Interplay between Dopant, Exciplex, and Host Emission

Kolosov, Dmitry, Adamovich, Vadim, Djurovich, Peter, Thompson, Mark E., Adachi, Chihaya·2002·Journal of the American Chemical Society

Abstract

Four different 1,8-naphthalimide derivatives were examined in phosphorescent organic light emitting diodes (OLEDs), i.e., 1,8-naphthalimide, N-phenyl-1,8-naphthalimide, N-2,6-dibromophenyl-1,8-naphthalimide (niBr), and bis-N,N-1,8-naphthalimide. Photoluminescence from all four naphthalimides have violet-blue fluorescence and phosphorescent bands between 550 and 650 nm (visible at 77 K). While all four compounds gave good glassy films when doped with a phosphorescent dopant, only the niBr films remained glassy for extended periods. OLED studies focused on niBr, with two different architectures. One OLED structure (type 1) had the niBr layer as a doped luminescent layer and an undoped niBr layer to act as a hole-blocking layer. The alternate structure (type 2) utilizes a doped CBP layer as the luminescent layer and the niBr layer is used as a hole-blocking layer only (CBP = 4,4'-N,N'-dicarbazolylbiphenyl). Type 1 and 2 OLEDs were prepared with green, yellow, and red emissive phosphorescent dopants (Irppy, btIr, and btpIr, respectively). The dopants were organometallic Ir complexes, previously shown to give highly efficient OLEDs. Of the three dopants, the btpIr-based OLEDs showed the best device performance in both structures (peak efficiencies for type 2: 3.2% and 2.3 lum/W at 6.3 V; type 1: 1.7% and 1.3 lm/W at 6.1 V). The green and yellow dopants gave very similar performance in both type 1 and 2 devices (peak efficiencies are 0.2-0.3%), which were significantly poorer than the btpIr-based OLEDs. The emission spectrum of the btIr- and btpIr-based devices (type 1 and 2) are the same as the solution photoluminescence spectrum of the dopant alone, while the Irppy device gives a broad red emission line (lambda(max) = 640 nm). The red Irppy.niBr emission line is assigned to an Irppy.niBr exciplex. The type 2 Irppy-based device gave a voltage-dependent spectrum, with the red emission observed at low bias (4-8 V), switching over to strong green emission as the bias was raised. All other devices showed bias-independent spectra. Estimates of HOMO, LUMO, and excited-state energies (dopant, niBr, and exciplex) were used to explain the observed spectral properties of these devices. btpIr-based devices emit efficiently from isolated dopant states (external efficiencies = 3.2 %, 2.3 lum/W). Irppy-based devices emit only from exciplex states, with low efficiency (external efficiency = 0.3%). btIr.niBr films have very similar energies for the dopant, exciplex, and niBr triplet states, such that relaxation can go through any of these states, leading to low device efficiency (external efficiency = 0.4%). High device efficiency is achieved only when dopant emission is the dominant pathway for relaxation, since exciplex and niBr triplet states give either weak or no electroluminescence.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/ja0263588

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Kolosov, D., Adamovich, V., Djurovich, P., Thompson, M. E., & Adachi, C.
Venue
Journal of the American Chemical Society
Published
2002-07-24
Volume
124
Issue
33
Pages
9945-9954
ISSN
  • 0002-7863 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5126
OpenAlex
W2005191958
Cited by
267
References
0
FWCI
10.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.