Divergent Electronic Structures of Isoelectronic Metalloclusters: Tungsten(II) Halides and Rhenium(III) Chalcogenide Halides

Abstract

Same but different: DFT calculations on hexanuclear tungsten(II) halide clusters [W(6)X(8)X'(6)](2-) (X, X'=Cl, Br, I) indicate a breakdown in the isoelectronic analogy between themselves and the isostructural rhenium(III) chalcogenide clusters [Re(6)S(8)X(6)](4-) (see figure).The hexanuclear tungsten(II) halide clusters and the sulfido-halide clusters of rhenium(III) are subsets of a broad system of 24-electron metal-metal bonded assemblies that share a common structure. Tungsten(II) halide clusters and rhenium(III) sulfide clusters luminesce from triplet excited states upon ultraviolet or visible excitation; emission from both cluster series has been extensively characterized elsewhere. Reported here are density-functional theory studies of the nine permutations of [W(6)X(8)X'(6)](2-) (X, X'=Cl, Br, I). Ground-state properties including geometries, harmonic vibrational frequencies, and orbital energy-level diagrams, have been calculated. Comparison is made to the sulfide clusters of rhenium(III), of which [Re(6)S(8)Cl(6)](4-) is representative. [W(6)X(8)X'(6)](2-) and [Re(6)S(8)Cl(6)](4-) possess disparate electronic structures owing to the greater covalency of the metal-sulfur bond and hence of the [Re(6)S(8)](2+) core. Low-lying virtual orbitals are raised in energy in [Re(6)S(8)Cl(6)](4-) with the result that the LUMO+7 (or LUMO+8 in some cases) of tungsten(II) halide clusters is the LUMO of [Re(6)S(8)Cl(6)](4-) species. An inversion of the HOMO and HOMO-1 between the two cluster series also occurs. Time-dependent density-functional calculations using asymptotically correct functionals do not recapture the experimentally observed periodic trend in [W(6)X(14)](2-) luminescence (E(em) increasing in the order [W(6)Cl(14)](2-) < [W(6)Br(14)](2-) < [W(6)I(14)](2-)), predicting instead that emission energies decrease with incorporation of the heavier halides. This circumstance is either a gross failure of the time-dependent formalism of DFT or it indicates extensive multistate emission in [W(6)X(8)X'(6)](2-) clusters. The inapplicability of isoelectronic analogies between clusters of Group 6 and Group 7 is emphasized.