Table 1. (a) Experimental STM-BJ Results of all Compoundsa.
| 1a | 1b | 2a | 2b | 3a | 3b | 4 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (a) | experimental | Ls (nm) | × | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 1.5 | 1.5 | × |
| G log (G/G0) | × | –5.0 | –3.7 | –4.0 | –5.9 | –5.9 | × | ||
| S (μV/K) | × | –2.6 | –3.5 | –2.5 | –15.6 | –5.0 | × | ||
| theoretical | L (nm) | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.1 | 1.1 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 1.2 | |
| (b) | G log (G/G0) | –4.1 | –5.7 | –4.7 | –4.9 | –6.4 | –5.8 | –6.5 | |
| S (μV/K) | –21.9 | –7.9 | –17.4 | –8.3 | –24.0 | –1.1 | –19.9 |
a
The crosses indicate that no significant conductance plateau was observed. Ls is the apparent stretching length (see Supporting Information for details). (b) Theoretical results of all compounds evaluated for the optimum geometry at tilt angle θ = 60°.