Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Excessively large exciton diffusion length calculated from the exciton diffusion test #120

Open
yangwc123 opened this issue Sep 1, 2021 · 2 comments

Comments

@yangwc123
Copy link

I have been trying to use Excimontec to study exciton diffusion in nonfullerene acceptor materials. First I used the dynamic test to reproduce the transients obtained from the pump-probe experiments. With appropriate choice of simulation parameters, such as the hopping rates, the energetic disorder, and the exciton lifetime, the experimental transients can be well reproduced. Then with these parameters I run the exciton diffusion test to calculate the diffusion lengths. However the results turn out to be much larger than the ones obtained by directly fitting the experimental transients. An extreme case is the NFA material IT4F, the calculated value is 48 nm while the experimental value is 27nm. For other cases, I find that the calculated value divided by $\sqrt{2}$ can be very close to the experimental value. But we cannot explain this $\sqrt{2}$ factor. It might be somehow related to the algorithm. Can you explain more about the algorithm in the User Manual? One question is that if the $L_d$ is calculated by first reaction algorithm directly, or the diffusion constant $D$ is calculated, and $L_d$ is obtained by $L_d=\sqrt{2dD\tau}$. Thank you!

@MikeHeiber
Copy link
Owner

The diffusion length is calculated using the mean displacement distance of the excitons in the simulation. I can't say for sure what might be going on. I am not actively developing this simulation right now, so you'll have to dig into the code and figure out what's going on. If you find any bugs and fix them, please consider submitting a pull request.

@yangwc123
Copy link
Author

yangwc123 commented Feb 6, 2022 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants