Skip to main content
. 2022 Dec 24;9(1):e12599. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12599

Table 3.

Second order perturbation theory analysis of the most interacting NBO’S of the studied quantum dots using B3LYP/6–311'+G (d) functional.

Compound Donor(i) Acceptor(j) E(2) kcal/mol E(j) − (i) F(ij)
QD-CCC σ(C11–C12) σ∗(C9–C10) 85,405.61 435.45 172.301
σ(C11–C12) σ∗(C7–C10) 68,831.94 274.64 122.833
σ(C24–C25) σ∗(C23–C24) 50,343.13 628.81 531.986
σ(C9–C11) σ∗(C7–C25) 47,767.52 682.25 161.376
σ(C10– C30) σ∗(C2–C24) 20,713.25 190.21 120.01
QD-NBC σ(C8–B36) Π(C10–C19) 17,824.67 2.96 2.565
σ(C8–B36) σ∗(C21–H24) 15,417.45 3.60 7.030
σ(C1–H17) σ∗(C3–C4) 5240.23 0.60 1.590
σ(C1–H17) Π∗(C2–C21) 3042.52 0.28 0.829
σ(C7–B36) σ∗(C28–B36) 747.11 0.27 0.407
QD-NBS σ(C10–C11) σ∗(C25–C26) 13,994.76 16.52 13.621
σ(C4–C5) σ∗(C25–C26) 13,762.25 20.84 15.179
σ(C1–H16) σ∗(C25–C26) 12,713.99 31.25 17.834
σ(C11–C12) σ∗(C13–H14) 2423.62 23.09 14.427
σ(C8–C30) Π∗(C22–C25) 800.85 7.27 2.411

E2 = stabilization energy (kcal/mol).

E (i), E(j) = energy difference between donor and acceptors.