The numbers referring to the ligand coverage were incorrectly reported in the Results/Discussion section. The previous numbers read: “The ligand coverage was within the range 1.6–1.9 TET-CA/nm2 for all sizes of QDs”. The corrected numbers should read: “The ligand coverage was within the range 0.45–0.7 TET-CA/nm2 for all sizes of QDs”. See below for the updated Table S1 and Figure S2.
| exciton band gap (eV) | diameter (nm) | size distribution (%) | ligand/QD | ligand/nm2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.90 | 4.9 | 5.3 | 37.0 | 0.47 |
| 1.00 | 4.3 | 8.0 | 34.0 | 0.57 |
| 1.08 | 4.0 | 6.3 | 25.6 | 0.53 |
| 1.18 | 3.5 | 8.2 | 24.5 | 0.63 |
| 1.30 | 3.1 | 4.9 | 20.8 | 0.69 |
Absorption spectra of PbS QDs and PbS QDs with TET-CA ligand in toluene, used to determine the ligand coverage.
These changes do not alter any of the discussion or conclusions made in the article.
Correction to Direct vs Delayed Triplet Energy Transfer
from Organic Semiconductors to Quantum Dots and Implications for Luminescent
Harvesting of Triplet Excitons
Facebook
Twitter
Linkedin
Whatsapp
