How surface-specific is 2nd-order non-linear spectroscopy?

27Citations
Citations of this article
50Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Surfaces and interfaces play important roles in many processes and reactions and are therefore intensively studied, often with the aim of obtaining molecular-level information from just the interfacial layer. Generally, only the first few molecular layers next to the interface are relevant for the surface processes. In the past decades, 2nd-order nonlinear spectroscopies including sum-frequency generation and second harmonic generation have developed into powerful tools for obtaining molecularly specific insights into the interfacial region. These approaches have contributed substantially to our understanding of a wide range of physical phenomena. However, along with their wide-ranging applications, it has been realized that the implied surface-specificity of these approaches may not always be warranted. Specifically, the bulk quadrupole contribution beyond the electric dipole-approximation for a system with a weak nonlinear interface signal, as well as the diffuse layer contribution at charged interfaces, could mask the surface information. In this perspective paper, we discuss the surface-specificity of 2nd-order nonlinear spectroscopy, especially considering these two contributions.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sun, S., Schaefer, J., Backus, E. H. G., & Bonn, M. (2019). How surface-specific is 2nd-order non-linear spectroscopy? Journal of Chemical Physics, 151(23). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5129108

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free