G Model

CCLET 4174 No. of Pages 11

Chinese Chemical Letters xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Chinese Chemical Letters

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cclet

Review

Recent development of perylene diimide-based small molecular

non-fullerene acceptors in organic solar cells
Yuwei Duan, Xiaopeng Xu, Ying Li, Qiang Peng*
Key Laboratory of Green Chemistry and Technology of Ministry of Education, College of Chemistry, and State Key Laboratory of Polymer Materials Engineering,
Sichuan University, Chengdu 610064, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history:
Received 30 June 2017 Recently, perylene diimide (PDI) derivatives were attractive as the electron-deficient acceptor materials
Received in revised form 27 July 2017 in non-fullerene organic solar cells since Tang first used a single PDI compound as the n-type
Accepted 14 August 2017 semiconductor to fabricate photovoltaic devices in 1986, which achieved a power conversion efficiency of
Available online xxx 1%. Beside the monomeric PDIs, the linear and three dimensional (3D) PDI-based small molecular
acceptors have also made great achievements with the power conversion efficiencies over 9.0% in single-
Keywords: junction polymer solar cells, and over 10.0% in tandem solar cells. The excellent device performance can
Organic solar cells be realized by forming suitable twisted structure, developing suitable donor materials and optimizing
Perylene diimide
device technologies. In this review, we summarize the recent development of PDI-based small molecular
Non-fullerene acceptor
non-fullerene acceptors in non-fullerene organic solar cells, including molecular design strategies and
Structure-property relationships
structure-property relationships.
© 2017 Chinese Chemical Society and Institute of Materia Medica, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences.
Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction scale production and purification. Therefore, non-fullerene accept-

Organic solar cells (OSCs) have attracted considerable attention
because of their easy fabrication of low-cost, light-weight, flexible
and large-area devices with a wet process, such as spin-coating and
roll-to-roll printing technologies, etc. [1,2]. Traditionally, the active
layer of OSCs consists of a polymer or small molecule as the donor
material and a fullerene derivative as the acceptor material,
respectively. In the past decades, high-performance donor
materials were deeply studied by fine-tuning the molecular and
electronic properties to match the requirements of fullerene
acceptors well. The commonly used acceptor materials were
mainly based on phenyl-C61-butyric acid methyl ester (PC61BM),
phenyl-C71-butyric acid methyl ester (PC71BM), indene-C60
bisadduct (ICBA) and indene-C70 bisadduct (IC70BA), which had
strong electron affinity, ultrafast photo-induced separation and
transfer and high isotropic electron mobility [3–6]. The power
conversion efficiency (PCE) of fullerene-based OSCs has already
exceeded 10% both in single-junction and tandem cells [7,8].
However, fullerene acceptors have some intrinsic drawbacks, such
as low absorption in the UV-visible region, difficult to modify their
chemical structures and energy levels, and expensive for large-
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: qiangpengjohnny@yahoo.com (Q. Peng).
ors (NFAs) have been put forward recently to overcome the
limitations of fullerene derivatives. With the rapid development in
the past few years, the PCE of NFA-based OSCs have reached more
than 12%, which implied that NFAs can replace fullerene
derivatives as a new generation of efficient acceptor materials [9].
Similar to donor materials, NFAs could also be divided into two
types: polymers (P-NFAs) and small molecules (SM-NFAs), which
should have the strong electron-deficient units in the conjugated
backbones. Some good candidates of P-NFAs were reported
typically with the acceptor building blocks of naphthalene diimide
(NDI), perylene diimide (PDI), B N bridged bipyridine (BNBP) and
so on [10–13]. In addition, PDI, NDI, fluoranthene-fused imide,
diketopyrrolopyrrole (DPP), and 3,9-bis[2-(3-oxo-2-vinyl-2,3-
dihydroinden-1-ylidene)-malononitrile have also been used to
design the high-performance SM-NFAs [14–17]. From the liter-
atures, PDI derivatives are the most popular acceptor materials,
since Tang et al. reported the first non-fullerene OSC in 1986 using a
single PDI derivative (PV) as the acceptor material, which exhibited
a relatively low PCE of 1% [18]. PDI has a large and rigid planar
p-conjugated plane, leading to excellent structural stability, strong
electron-accepting ability and high electron mobility (>1 cm2 V1
s1) in their functional materials [19–21]. The structure of PDI can
be modified by introducing alkyl chains at the N-positions to
enhance the solubility and introducing aryl substituents at its
a/b-positions to adjust the electronic and optical properties.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cclet.2017.08.025
1001-8417/ © 2017 Chinese Chemical Society and Institute of Materia Medica, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: Y. Duan, et al., Recent development of perylene diimide-based small molecular non-fullerene acceptors in
organic solar cells, Chin. Chem. Lett. (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cclet.2017.08.025
G Model
CCLET 4174 No. of Pages 11

2 Y. Duan et al. / Chinese Chemical Letters xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

However, the device performance of PDI-based OSCs is still lagging
behind that of fullerene-based counterparts, which is mainly
limited by its strong self-aggregation to form microscale or sub-
microscale phase separation in its blend films. Many strategies
have been used to resolve this issue. For monomeric PDI
derivatives, introducing aryl substituents at the a/b-positions
would break the self-aggregation to some extent. For PDI dimers
with a conjugated bridge, variable core units, such as benzene,
thiophene, selenophene and their fused structures, were inserted
between two PDI groups to form a twisted conformation and
suppress the self-aggregation of PDI efficiently. Another way to
suppress the self-aggregation of PDI is to develop three-
dimensional (3D) molecular structures. For example, Zhan et al.
reported a star-shaped PDI acceptor of S(TPA-PDI), which exhibited
a quasi-3D nonplanar structure and isotropic optical and charge
transfer properties [22]. By using this design strategy, more and
more 3D high-performance PDI derivatives have pushed forward
the PCEs of NFA-based OSCs to over 9% [23–25].
Here, we review the research activities of PDI-based small
molecular acceptors for OSC applications, by the sequence of
monomeric PDI, linear PDI dimers, trimers and oligomers with/
without a conjugated bridge, and PDI trimers and tetramers with a
3D structure. We also highlighted different structural modification
effect on the inherent properties and the final device performance
of PDI derivatives, which would help us to understand deeply the
structure-property relationships of PDI-based SM-NFAs for realiz-
ing highly efficient OSCs. The chemical structures of the related
donor materials are listed in Fig. 1.
2. Monomeric PDI derivatives as the acceptors
In fact, PDI was first used as an acceptor material in OSCs in
1986 by Tang et al. [18]. Double-junction OSCs fabricated with PV as
the acceptor layer and copper phthalocyanine (CuPc) as the donor
layer had achieved a PCE of 1%. As mentioned above, the serious
self-aggregation of PDI induced the low efficiency in that work. In
2000, Dittmer et al. used MEH-PPV as the donor material and a
soluble PDI as the electron acceptor to fabricate OSC devices for
exploring the formation of crystal network [26]. PDI was blended
later with HBC-PhC12, delivering a higher PCE of 1.95% with a short-

Fig. 1. Chemical structures of the related donor materials in this review.

Please cite this article in press as: Y. Duan, et al., Recent development of perylene diimide-based small molecular non-fullerene acceptors in
organic solar cells, Chin. Chem. Lett. (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cclet.2017.08.025
G Model
CCLET 4174 No. of Pages 11
Y. Duan et al. / Chinese Chemical Letters xxx (2017) xxx–xxx
circuit current density (Jsc) of 7.07 mA/cm2, open-circuit voltage
(Voc) of 0.69 V and fill factor (FF) of 40% [27]. In 2009, Xie et al.
reported another bulk-heterojunction (BHJ) OSCs using P3HT:PDI
blend as the active layer, which exhibited a relatively low PCE of
0.25% due to the strong self-aggregation of PDI and unmatched
energy levels between P3HT and PDI [28]. In 2013, Bazan et al.
employed p-DTS(FBTTh2)2 as the donor material, which exhibited a
good complimentary absorption with PDI, leading to a very broad
coverage of visible spectrum within 300–800 nm [29]. Thus, the
PCE of 3.0% was finally obtained after device optimization. When
adding the processing additive of DIO, the PCEs of p-DTS(FBTTh2)2:
PDI devices were further elevated to 3.1% [30]. Subsequently, Zhan
et al. optimized the D/A ratio of p-DTS(FBTTh2)2:PDI to 1.3:1, and
the much higher PCE of 5.13% was achieved [31]. Recently,
Keivanidis et al. used PBDTTT-C-T as the donor material and PDI as
the acceptor material, the related OSCs showed a PCE up to 3.71%
[32]. Yao et al. synthesized a series of monomeric PDI derivatives
(O-PDI-O, B-PDI-O and B-PDI-B) by attaching the 2-methoxyle-
thoxyl side chain and BDT unit in turn on the PDI skeleton [33,34].
B-PDI-B exhibited a broad absorption ranging from 650 nm to
800 nm in solid state because of the photoinduced intramolecular
charge transfer (ICT) from the BDT segments to the PDI core. The
enhanced absorption promoted the usage of near IR photons. In
addition, the steric hindrance between the PDI and BDT units
formed a twisted structural conformation, which effectively
suppressed the aggregation tendency of PDI and resulted in a
reduced domain size going from 0.5 mm to 20 nm. When using
P3HT as the donor material, B-PDI-B devices showed a PCE of 1.66%.
Modification of PDI with aromatic groups at the bay positions
was another method to develop efficient monomeric PDI accept-
ors. Marks et al. synthesized a series of PDI derivatives, hexyl-PDI,
phenethyl-PDI, and phenyl-PDI, which were substituted with
hexyl, phenethyl and phenyl at the 2,5,8,11-positions of PDI
skeleton, respectively [35]. All the molecules exhibited slip-
stacking in the solid state, thus preventing the coupling necessary
for rapid excimer formation. Although these materials underwent
efficient charge separation, PBTI3T:phenyl-PDI had the matched
energy levels, intermediate crystallinity and the optimized
domains. Geminate recombination was observed in phenyl-PDI
devices with the highest PCE of 3.67%. Sun et al. synthesized a
twisted PDI monomer of TP-PDI, in which four phenyl groups were
appended at the bay positions of PDI skeleton [36]. TP-PDI
exhibited a weak aggregation in the solid state, a broad but strong
absorption in the visible region from 400 nm to 700 nm, and a deep
LUMO level of 3.82 eV. The OSCs based on PTB7-Th:TP-PDI
achieved a high PCE of 4.1% when adding 1% of CN as the additive.
Zheng et al. reported a series of ortho-functionalized PDI acceptors
of PDI-4Mes, PDI-4Th, PDI-2S-4Mes and PDI-2S-4Th by 1,4-
addition of aryl Grignard reagents, which provided a new avenue
to directly functionalize the 2,5,8,11-positions of PDI unit with
different aryl substituents [37]. The PTB7-Th:PDI-2S-4Th devices
showed a PCE as high as 5.19%, that was a new record for single PDI
acceptors in OSCs. With different functional groups of pyrene and
tert-butyl pyrene, Su et al. reported two SMAs of P1 and P2 [38].
These two acceptors possessed a broad absorption covering the
wavelength range of 400–650 nm and a relatively high LUMO
energy level of 3.77 eV. When using PTB7 as the donor material,
the PCE of the OSCs based on P2 was only 0.41%, while a higher PCE
of 1.35% was obtained for P1 devices with the same D/A ratio (1:1).
Sharma et al. synthesized a symmetrical perylene-anthracene
diimide acceptor of P-A with the tert-butylphenoxy side chains at
the 1,7-bay positions of PDI skeleton. A PCE of 2.85% was achieved
when using BTD-TNP as the donor material [39]. By replacing
anthracene with pyrene, Sharma et al. reported a perylene–pyrene
bisimide acceptor of PPI later [40]. A PCE was decreased to 1.87%
when the blend ratio was optimized to be 1:3.5 for donor (T) and
Please cite this article in press as: Y. Duan, et al., Recent development of perylene diimide-based small molecular non-fullerene acceptors in
organic solar cells, Chin. Chem. Lett. (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cclet.2017.08.025
3
PPI. However, a thin ZnO layer was inserted between the active
layer and the top Al electrode, the corresponding PCE was elevated
to 2.46%, which would thank for the enhanced light absorption
because of the optical interference between incident light and
reflected light at the Al electrode. The PCE was further increased to
3.17% when the device with the ZnO layer was annealed at 100  C
for 5 min. Employing acetonaphthopyrazine dicarbonitrile as
functional moieties, the same group synthesized another sym-
metrical PDI acceptor of PERI [41]. The maximum absorption of
PERI film peaked at 455 nm and the absorption onset was observed
at 583 nm, corresponding to a large optical bandgap of 2.13 eV.
PERI:Se-SM devices showed a low PCE of 1.28%, which was
improved to 3.88% when the devices were treated with the thermal
annealing process. Kozma et al. reported three PDI acceptors of
PDI-SF, PDI-BSF and PDI-BT, with the conjugated bithiophene,
spirofluorene and bithiophene spirobifluorene groups at the bay
positions [42]. The OSC devices based on P3HT and PDI-SF showed
the PCE of 1.58%, while the relatively lower PCE values of 1.18% and
0.81% were achieved for the cases from PDI-BSF and PDI-BT. The
reason was that the bithiophene units attached on the PDI
skeletons in PDI-BSF and PDI-BT lowered the HOMO-LUMO energy
gap and thus generated a spectral overlap between the acceptor
and the donor materials. The chemical structures of monomeric
PDI acceptors are listed in Fig. 2.
3. Linear PDI derivatives as the acceptors
3.1. PDI dimers with a bridged core
Beside the monomeric PDIs, PDI dimers are also received wide
attention as acceptor materials in OSCs. Two PDI units in PDI
dimers are often separated by the conjugated bridge to decrease
the self-aggregation of PDI backbone. Yao et al. reported a PDI
dimer of bis-PDI-T-EG bridged with an oligothienyl group [43].
When blending with PBDTTT-CT donor and adding 5% of DIO
additive, bis-PDI-T-EG devices showed a PCE of 4.03% [33]. After
that, the same group replaced the thiophene bridge with
selenophene candidate, and synthesized the similar PDI dimer
of bis-PDI-Se-EG [44]. Also using the same polymer donor of
PBDTTT-C-T, bis-PDI-Se-EG devices showed a comparable PCE of
4.01%. Later, they further improved the device performance by
optimizing the fabrication condition, such as adjusting the additive
content, using the solvent vapor annealing (SVA) possess [45].
Finally, the recombination of the devices was suppressed
efficiently and the electron mobility was enhanced at the same
time, which promoted the PCE from 1.44% to 6.08%. Zhan et al. also
reported a series of PDI dimmers (PnTP, n = 0–3) with the
oligothiophene as the separated bridge [46]. PnTP showed the
maximum absorptions within 538–570 nm in solution, which
would be enhanced and red-shifted with increasing the numbers
of the thiophene unit. P0TP exhibited the lowest HOMO (5.74 eV)
and LUMO (3.84 eV) levels. The increase of thiophene numbers
could up-shift the HOMO and LUMO energy levels of these PDI
dimers, which were attributed to the strong electron-donating
feature of the oligothiophene bridge. When blending P(0-3)TP with
a low bandgap polymer donor of PBDTTT-C-T, the PSCs exhibited
decreased device performance with increasing the number of
thiophene units. Thus, PCEs of 3.61%, 0.79% and 0.91% were
achieved for P1TP-, P2TP- and P3TP-based OSCs. Yan et al. reported
two bithiophene-bridged PDI dimers (iMe2T2-PDI2 and oMe2T2-
PDI2), on which two simple methyl groups were attached at
different positions of thiophene banckbone [47]. The dihedral
angles between the two PDI planes were about 60 for i-Me2T2-
PDI2 and 90 for o-Me2T2-PDI2, which caused a smaller domain size
of i-Me2T2-PDI2 blend than o-Me2T2-PDI2 counterpart when
blending with the same polymer donor of PffBT4T-2DT. Therefore,
G Model
CCLET 4174 No. of Pages 11
4 Y. Duan et al. / Chinese Chemical Letters xxx (2017) xxx–xxx
Fig. 2. Chemical structures of the monomeric PDI acceptors.
i-Me2T2-PDI2 devices achieved a higher PCE of 4.1% than that of o-
Me2T2-PDI2 devices (3.1%). Jung et al. reported two NF-NFAs of F2B-
T2PDI and T2PDI linked by the bridge of 2,5-difluorobenzene (F2B)
or bithiophene [48]. Compared with T2PDI, F2B-T2PDI had a more
rigid core and enhanced molecular packing property. The
fluorination down-shifted the energy levels to prevent back-
transfer of holes from the acceptor to the cathode and enhanced
the complementary absorption with the donor polymer of PTB7-
Th. Because of the geometric and energetic effects from 2,5-
difluorobenzene (F2B) moiety, the PCE of 5.05% was achieved for
F2B-T2PDI-based devices, whereas that was 3.63% by using T2PDI.
Zhao et al. reported a series of PDI dimers with various arylene
linkers [49]. Using P3HT as the donor, the PCE of 2.35% was
achieved for spirobifluorene-linked SF-PDI2. Subsequently, Yan
et al. employed SF-PDI2 as SM-NFAs and a novel polymer of
PffBT4T-2DT as donor material to fabricate more efficient solar
cells [50]. The resulting devices showed an impressively large Voc
of 0.98 V and a high PCE of 6.3%. The Voc loss of this device was only
0.67 V, which was among the lowest values of Voc losses for OSCs.
By fine-tuning the energy levels of polymer donors, the same group
synthesized a new polymer donor of P3TEA, which exhibited only
0.05 eV LUMO energy level offset with SF-PDI2, giving rise to a high
Voc of 1.11 V and a low Voc loss of 0.61 V. Combining with the high Jsc
of 13.27 mA/cm2 and an FF of 64.3%, the PCE was further elevated
to 9.5%, which is the best value for PDI-based single-junction OSCs
[23]. To improve the light harvesting property, they used P3TEA:
SF-PDI2 as the active layer and fabricated a homo-tandem device
with a mild thermal annealing treatment. The PCE was finally
improved to 10.8% with a high Voc of 2.13 V [51]. Choi et al. reported
the M- and V-shaped PDI dimers of CP-M and CP-V with a non-
conjugated 1,1-diphenylcyclohexane bridge [52]. CP-V could mix
well with PPDT2FBT and maintained the appropriate domains,
which could facilitate exciton dissociation/diffusion and provide
suitable percolation pathways for charge transfer. Therefore, in
comparison with CP-M cells, the CP-V devices displayed a better
performance with a PCE of 5.28%.
Ph2a was a ring-fused compound with benzene as the central
core [53]. The ring-fusion resulted in increased electronic coupling
between the two PDI units, which could increase its electron
mobility. The blend of Ph2a and PTB7-Th showed a significantly
Please cite this article in press as: Y. Duan, et al., Recent development of perylene diimide-based small molecular non-fullerene acceptors in
organic solar cells, Chin. Chem. Lett. (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cclet.2017.08.025
decreased recombination. Thus, the Jsc was increased from 1.54 mA
/cm2 to 7.68 mA/cm2 and the PCE was also elevated from 0.23%
to 3.89%. When fused with heterocycles at the bay positions of PDI,
such as furan, thiophene and selenophene, a series of non-planar
fused PDI analogues of FPDI-F, FPDI-T, and FPDI-Se were prepared
by Jen’s group [54]. Compared to the non-fused counterparts, the
fused PDI dimers showed the reduced reorganization energy and
extended p-conjugation, which was helpful for exciton diffusion
and charge transfer. In addition, by changing the chalcogen atoms
from S to O and Se, FPDI-F and FPDI-Se exhibited the similar
absorptions and energy levels with FPDI-T, while their molecular
geometries could be optimized by varying the atomic size in the
sequence of O < S < Se. With increasing the chalcogen atomic size
(O < S < Se), the twist angles between two PDI planes would be
enlarged from 15.8 (FPDI-F) to 24.4 (FPDI-T) and 27.2 (FPDI-Se).
FPDI-T had a modest twist angle but balanced above mentioned
factors, resulting in the highest carrier mobilities and the best PCE
of 6.72%. Chen et al. reported another SM-NFA of FITP, in which two
PDI units were fused with the indacenodithieno[3,2-b]thiophene
(IDTT) central core [55]. This fully fused backbone made FITP
possess superior charge carrier transfer property and elevated
LUMO level. As a result, the OSCs based on FITP and PTB7-Th
exhibited a high PCE of 7.33% with a high Voc of 0.99 V. Yu et al.
reported four PDI dimers of aPPID, aPBDT, bPPID and bPBDT,
which were linked by the core of pyrene diimide (PID) or benzo
[1,2-b:4,5-b’]-dithiophene (BDT) at the ortho- or bay-position of
PDI skeleton, respectively [56]. Because of the good planarity and
strong p-stacking feature of ortho-functionalized PDI, aPBDT and
aPPID exhibited a strong aggregation tendency, which endowed
these molecules with high electron mobility. When blending with
PBT7-Th, the inverted OSCs achieved the PCE of 4.92% for aPBDT
and 3.61% for aPPID, which were 39% and 4% higher than those of
the bPBDT and bPPID. At the same time, Welch et al. incorporated
thienoisoindigo (TII), diketopyrrolopyrrole (DPP) and isoindigo
(ISI) to N-annulated PDI, and reported a series of PDI dimers of PDI-
DPP-PDI, TII-B, DPP-B and ISI-B [57,58]. It was found that the DPP-
based acceptor of DPP-B outperformed the other derivatives,
demonstrating an energy loss of less than 0.6 eV and a promising
efficiency of 4.1%. Blakey et al. synthesized a new PDI-thiazole-
based NFA ((TsCDI)2T) with a thiophene bridge, by KOtBu-initiated
G Model
CCLET 4174 No. of Pages 11

Y. Duan et al. / Chinese Chemical Letters xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 5

aryl C-H iodination [59]. Using PTB7-Th as donor, the resulting
OSCs based on (TsCDI)2T showed a PCE of 4.7%. The chemical
structures of linear PDI dimers with a bridged core are listed in
Fig. 3.
3.2. PDI dimers and trimers without a bridged core
In order to obtain the twisted conformation, two PDI units can
be covalently linked by just a single carbon-carbon bond to afford
the PDI dimer of s-diPBI. Wang et al. first synthesized s-diPBI by the
one-step homocoupling of halogenated PDIs in the presence of
copper powder as catalyst [60]. It showed a broad absorption in the
range of 400 nm to 600 nm with a LUMO level was 3.91 eV. When
blending with the donor of PBDTTT-C-T, the PCE was 3.63%. Hou
et al. replaced PBDTTT-C-T with PBDTBDD as the donor material,
the PCEs could be improved up to 4.39% [61]. The better device
performance of PBDTBDD:s-diPBI system was originated from the
improved exciton dissociation efficiency, enhanced crystallinity
and optimized nanophase separation. Based on the blend of PTB7-
Th and s-diPBI, Jen et al. fabricated the inverted device configura-
tion with a SAM-modified ZnO interface, the PCE was further
elevated to 5.90% [62]. They also studied the molecular geometry
effect of PDI dimers (s-diPBI and PPDI) on blend morphology and
photovoltaic performance [63]. The results indicated that the more
flexible and twisted structure of s-diPBI could disrupt the p–p
stacking of PTB7-Th, leading to the lower electron and hole
mobilities than those of PTB7-Th:PPDI. In addition, PPDI acceptor
could not only mix well with PTB7-Th, but also maintain
appropriate aggregation domains for more efficient exciton
dissociation and suitable percolation pathways for faster charge
transfer. Thus, the PCE of PTB7-Th:PPDI device was improved
finally to 6.41%. In order to improve the performance of PTB7-Th:s-
diPBI devices, an amine-functionalized PDI (PDIN) was also used as
the electron-transporting layer. PDIN possessed the respectable
charge-transporting properties and possible interfacial doping
capability to the PDI-based acceptors, which was positive for
improving the charge transport and extraction efficiency. There-
fore, the PCEs of PTB7-Th:s-diPBI devices were increased from
5.52% to 6.29% [64]. Li et al. introduced the cyan group onto PDI
skeleton and synthesized a PDI dimer of SdiCNPBI, which exhibited
a deep LUMO of 4.56 eV [65]. When using the PDPP2TzT and
PDPP2Tz2T as the donors, the devices showed the relatively low
PCE of 1.4% for PDPP2Tz2T:SdiCNPBI and 0.72% for PDPP2TzT:
SdiCNPBI, respectively.
Introduction of heteroatoms would enhance the intermolecular
interactions through van der Waals and heteroatom-heteroatom

Fig. 3. Chemical structures of linear PDI dimers with a bridged core.

Please cite this article in press as: Y. Duan, et al., Recent development of perylene diimide-based small molecular non-fullerene acceptors in
organic solar cells, Chin. Chem. Lett. (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cclet.2017.08.025
G Model
CCLET 4174 No. of Pages 11

6 Y. Duan et al. / Chinese Chemical Letters xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

interactions, which could improve the device performance of the
corresponding semiconducting materials based on fused or
extended heteroarenes. Wang et al. modified s-diPBI by inserting
S or Se atoms in the bay positions and reported two novel NF-NFAs
of SdiPBI-S and SdiPBI-Se [66,67]. These molecules had a more
twisted molecular configuration and a higher LUMO level than s-
diPBI. The PDI subunits in SdiPDI-S or SdiPDI-Se were almost
perpendicular to each other, with the dihedral angles of 80 and
77, respectively. When blending with the wide bandgap polymer
of PDBT-T1, the devices showed PCEs of 7.16% and 8.4% for SdiPBI-S
and SdiPBI-Se. Sun et al. used PBDTS-Se as the donor material and
SdiPBI-S as the acceptor material to fabricate another high-
performance device with a PCE of 8.22% [68]. Later, Welch et al.
found that incorporation of a nitrogen heteroatom (so called “N-
annulation”) at the bay position of PDI would increase structural
diversity through modulation of the N-R functional group, thus
allowing for the tailored self-assembly [69]. Through such N-alkyl
chain modification, they reported a PDI dimer of S-diPDIN, which
obtained a PCE of 3.13% when blended with PTB7. The PCE was
further increased to 5.54% and 7.55% by using another two
excellent donor polymers of PTB7-Th and P3TEA, respectively.
The adjacent PDI units could be fused with a two-carbon bridge,
which was first reported by Nuckolls’s group as the high-
performance NFA materials. A series of helical PDI molecules
(hPDI1, hPDI3 and hPDI4) with different numbers of PDI units were
synthesized for comparison [70,71]. All of them showed a relative
high electron mobility, strong absorption within 350 nm and
550 nm, good electron-accepting ability, and suitful LUMO level
(ca. 4 eV). The strong aggregation of PDI backbone was efficiently
suppressed due to their twisted molecular conformations. Thus,
the high PCEs of PTB7:hPDI1, PTB7-Th:hPDI3 and PTB7-Th:hPDI4
devices were obtained as 5.21%, 7.9% and 8.3%, respectively.
Subsequently, the same group reported two nanoribbon-like PDI
derivatives (hPDI2-Pyr-hPDI2 and hPDI3-Pyr-hPDI3), which were
synthesized by fusing two electron-deficient PDI trimers with an
electron-rich alkoxy-modified pyrene central core [72]. The
rigidity of the molecular backbone yielded a sharply red-shifted
absorption edge. The non-fullerene OSCs fabricated with hPDI2-
Pyr-hPDI2 and hPDI3-Pyr-hPDI3 showed PCEs of 6.9% and 7.6%
without any optimization. Yang et al. reported two novel PDI
dimers (SdiPBI-BT and diPBI-BT), with fusing a thienobenzene unit
at the bay region of the PDI skeleton [73]. The resulting PDI dimers
exhibited a higher-lying LUMO level and an extended conjugation
system. As a result, a PCE of 6.71% was achieved with a high Voc of
0.95 V, a Jsc of 10.31 mA/cm2 and a high FF of 68.7% from PDBT-T1:
SdiPBI-BT devices.
Another effective method to disrupt the planarity and reduce
the aggregation of the PDI derivatives is to link the corresponding
PDI subunits through the N-N bond at amide position [72–75].
Narayan et al. used TP as the acceptor material and PBDTTT-C-T as
the donor material and reported the related non-fullerene OSCs
with a PCE of 3%, which was 10-fold increase in Jsc in comparison
with the counterpart based on monomeric PDI [75]. Hou et al.
reported an N-N-linked PDI derivative (PPDI), which used C5H11
instead of C7H15 in TP [76]. Benefiting from the enhanced
interchain p-p stacking of the polymer donor, the PBDT-TS1:PPDI
blend showed a relatively higher and symmetric hole and electron
mobility. Thus, a high PCE of 5.58% (certificated as 5.40%) was
obtained in the fabricated fullerene-free OSCs based on PBDTTS1:
PPDI. Jen et al. recently also reported a high-performance OSCs
with a PCE of 6.41% by using PTB7-Th:PPDI as the active layer [62].
Later, Hou et al. synthesized a SM-NFA of H-tri-PDI, which
composed of three PDI units connected together via N-N linkage
[77]. The PBDTTS1:H-tri-PDI devices showed a PCE as high as
7.25%, benefiting from the appropriate energy level alignment and
the favorable morphology of the active layer, which was the

Fig. 4. Chemical structures of linear PDI derivatives without a bridged core.

Please cite this article in press as: Y. Duan, et al., Recent development of perylene diimide-based small molecular non-fullerene acceptors in
organic solar cells, Chin. Chem. Lett. (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cclet.2017.08.025
G Model
CCLET 4174 No. of Pages 11

Y. Duan et al. / Chinese Chemical Letters xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 7

highest value in this type of PDI derivatives. The chemical
structures of linear PDI dimers without a bridged core are listed
in Fig. 4. The photovoltaic parameters of the OSCs based on linear
PDIs as the acceptors are also provided in Table 1.
4. Three-dimensional (3D) PDI derivatives as the acceptors
4.1. 3D PDI trimers
Apart from linear PDI acceptors, three dimensional (3D) PDI
SMAs linked with different cores have also been explored. Lin et al.
reported a star-shaped PDI trimer of S(TPA-PDI) with a triphenyl-
amine (TPA) core [22]. S(TPA-PDI) had the isotropic optical and
charge-transporting properties due to the sp3 hybrid orbital of
nitrogen atom of TPA. In addition, S(TPA-PDI) exhibited weak
molecular aggregation, a strong absorption in the visible region
and appropriate energy levels, which could be matched well with
the used low bandgap polymer donor of PBDTTT-C-T. A maximum
PCE of 3.45% was then achieved based on PBDTTTC-T:S(TPA-PDI)
(1:1, w/w) blend adding 5% of DIO. By introducing S or Se-
annulated PDI as the peripheral groups, Yang et al. synthesized two
novel star-shaped SMAs of TPA-PDI-S and TPA-PDI-Se, the PCEs
were further elevated to 6.10% [78]. Lu et al. also synthesized a TPA-
based acceptor of TPA(T-PDIEG)3, which showed edge-to-face type
of p-p stacking in the corresponding solid films. The PCE of 1.92%
was obtained by adding 3% of DIO when using PBDTTT-C-T:TPA(T-
PDI-EG)3 as the active layer [79].
Wang et al. reported C3-symmetric PDI trimers of triperylene
hexaimides (TPH) and selenium annulated triperylene hexaimides
(TPH-Se), which consisted of three PDI subunits or selenium
annulated PDI subunits adjoined at a single benzene ring [24]. Both
small molecules had a twisted three-bladed propeller configura-
tion with the compact 3D network assembly. They also showed the
broad and strong absorption in the region within 300–600 nm,
together with suitable LUMO levels of about 3.8 eV. The
integration of selenophene onto TPH skeleton endowed TPH-Se
with a more distorted propeller configuration and a more compact
3D network assembly because of the Se  O interactions. Using
TPH and TPH-Se as the acceptor materials, the related non-
fullerene OSCs showed the high PCEs of 8.28% and 9.28%,
respectively. The same group further employed TPH as the
acceptor material to fabricate all small molecular OSCs using
DRCN5T as the donor material, which exhibited a PCE of 6.16% [80].
To study the length effect of branched alkyl side chain on the
photovoltaic performance of TPH, Wang et al. designed and
synthesized a series of propeller-shaped triperylene hexaimides
(TPH-4, TPH-5, TPH-6, TPH-7) as the NFAs for OSC applications
[81]. The physical properties, thin-film microstructure, molecular
packing, charge transport and resulting photovoltaic properties of
these materials have been systematically investigated in that work.
When blended with the wide bandgap polymer donor of PDBT-T1,
the devices based on TPH-4, TPH-5 and TPH-6 showed the similar
device performance, however, OSCs based on TPH-7 with the
longest alkyl chain exhibited the highest PCE of 8.64%. Chen et al.
reported a simple PDI trimer of B(PDI)3 with a benzene ring as the
central core [82]. B(PDI)3 had a highly twisted molecular structure,
which could help for reducing the strong aggregation of PDI units.
When B(PDI)3 was blended with PTB7-Th donor in OSCs, a good
PCE of 5.65% was achieved. Our group reported a novel PDI trimer
of Ta-PDI with an electron-withdrawing triazine as the central core
[25]. Compared with Ph-PDI with the benzene core, Ta-PDI had the
higher cryrtallinity as well as the more suppressed molecular
aggregation, yielding a much higher PCE of 9.15%. Recently, Chen
et al. reported two PDI trimers based on benzotrithiophene (BTT) as
the core, connecting via either single bond (TriPDI) or ring-fusion
(Fused-TriPDI) approaches [83]. Compared to TriPDI, the fused
TriPDI exhibited the good structural rigidity and planarity as well
as the effective conjugation along the whole molecular backbone.

Table 1
The photovoltaic parameters of the OSCs based on linear PDIs as the acceptors.

Acceptor Donor LUMO/HOMO (eV) Addictives D/A rato (w/w) Jsc (mA cm2) Voc (V) FF (%) PCE (%) Ref.
Bis-PDI-T-EG P3HT 3.84/5.65 CN 8% 1:1 2.89 0.59 44.8 0.76 [43]
bis-PDI-Se-EG PBDTTT-C-T 3.84/5.61 / 1:1 10.60 0.79 47.93 4.01 [44]
P1TP PBDTTT-C-T 3.72/5.66 / 1:1 7.78 0.89 52.1 3.61 [46]
i-Me2T2-PDI2 PffBT4T-2DT 3.57/5.82 / / 8.0 0.91 56 4.1 [47]
o-Me2T2-PDI2 PffBT4T-2DT 3.54/5.46 / / 6.80 0.89 51 3.1 [47]
SF-PDI2 P3TEA 3.6/6.0 / / 13.27 1.11 64.3 9.5 [51]
CP-M PPDT2FBT 3.85/5.92 DPE 3% 1:2 6.04 0.89 39.84 2.14 [52]
CP-V PPDT2FBT 3.98/6.16 DPE 3% 1:2 10.04 0.87 60.16 5.28 [52]
Ph2a PTB7-Th 4.03/6.36 DIO 1% 1:2.25 7.68 0.93 54.3 3.89 [53]
FPDI-T PTB7-Th 3.77/5.98 CN 2% 1:2 12.28 0.94 59.0 6.72 [54]
FITP PTB7-Th 3.75/5.48 CN 2% 1.2:1 13.24 0.99 56 7.33 [55]
aPBDT PTB7-Th 3.78/5.60 CN 5% 1:1.5 12.78 0.81 46 4.92 [56]
bPBDT PTB7-Th 3.76/5.64 CN 5% 1:1.5 9.83 0.81 44 3.53 [56]
PDI-DPP-PDI PTB7-Th 3.70/5.30 / 2:3 11.32 0.98 50.1 5.6 [57]
TII-B PTB7-Th 3.6/5.0 DIO 0.5% 1:1 1.09 0.93 34.2 0.4 [58]
DPP-B PTB7-Th 3.6/5.3 DIO 0.5% 1:1 5.98 0.97 50.3 2.9 [58]
ISI-B PTB7-Th 3.6/5.6 DIO 0.5% 1:1 6.97 1.03 36.7 2.6 [58]
SdiPDI PBDTTT-C-T 3.91/5.94 DIO 1.5% + CN 1.5% 2:3 10.58 0.73 46.8 3.63 [59]
SdiCNPBI PDPP2Tz2T 4.56/6.59 DIO 0.5% 2:3 5.50 0.77 34 1.4 [60]
SdiPDI-S PDBT-T1 3.85/6.27 DIO 0.75% 1:1 11.98 0.90 66.1 7.16 [66]
SdiPDI-Se PDBT-T1 3.87/6.09 DIO 0.25% 1:1 12.57 0.95 70.5 8.42 [67]
SdiPDI-S PBDTS-Se 3.85/6.27 DIO 0.5% 1:1 12.8 0.91 68.8 8.22 [68]
SdiPDI-N P3TEA 3.79/5.86 ODT 2.5% 2:3 11.03 1.13 61 7.55 [69]
hPDI1 PTB7-Th 3.77/6.04 DIO 1% + CN 1% 3:7 13.7 0.80 56 6.05 [70]
hPDI3 PTB7-Th 3.86/6.23 DIO 1% 1:1.5 14.5 0.80 67 7.9 [71]
hPDI4 PTB7-Th 3.91/6.26 DIO 1% 1:1 15.2 0.81 68 8.3 [71]
hPDI2-Pyr-hPDI2 PTB7-Th 3.73/5.80 / 2:3 14.3 0.83 58.1 6.9 [72]
hPDI3-Pyr-hPDI3 PTB7-Th 3.76/5.76 / 1:1 15.1 0.80 62.9 7.6 [72]
SdiPBI-BT PDBT-T1 3.67/5.79 DIO 0.2% 1:1 10.26 0.95 67.6 6.71 [73]
diPBI-BT PDBT-T1 3.75/5.48 DIO 0.5% 1.2:1 9.89 0.99 59.8 5.84 [73]
PPDI PBDT-TS1 3.86/5.90 / 1:1 12.51 0.82 53 5.40 [76]
H-tri-PDI PBDT-TS1 3.93/6.01 DPE 7% 1:1 16.52 0.732 60.03 7.25 [77]

Please cite this article in press as: Y. Duan, et al., Recent development of perylene diimide-based small molecular non-fullerene acceptors in
organic solar cells, Chin. Chem. Lett. (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cclet.2017.08.025
G Model
CCLET 4174 No. of Pages 11
8 Y. Duan et al. / Chinese Chemical Letters xxx (2017) xxx–xxx
Therefore, TriPDI showed up-shifted energy levels, enhanced
absorption and charge mobility than TriPDI. The OSCs based on
PTB7-Th:Fused-TriPDI blend showed a PCE of 6.19%, which was
around three times higher than that of PTB7-Th:TriPDI devices. The
chemical structures of 3D PDI trimers are listed in Fig. 5.
4.2. 3D PDI tetramers
The a-substituted PDI derivatives exhibited superior photovol-
taic performance than the corresponding b-isomers because of
their better planarity, which induced closer packing of p-conju-
gated backbone. Yu et al. reported a new a-substituted PDI
tetramer of TPBDT with a BDT-Th core, in which four PDI units
formed a cross-like molecular conformation [84]. The inverted
non-fullerene OSCs based on TPBDT showed a high PCE of 8.47%
with the extraordinary large Jsc value (>18 mA cm2) by adding a
small amount of DPE as the co-solvent. On the other hand,
b-substituted PDI tetramer of bTPB6 with a BDT-Th core was also
reported by Yu’s groups [85]. Extending the conjugation of bTPB6
by fusing with the thiophene cycle, bTPB6-C possessed a more
rigid molecular geometry. The inverted OSCs based on bTPB6-C
and PTB7-Th exhibited the larger PCE of 7.69%, which was 31%
higher than that of bTPB6-based devices. Wang et al. reported a PDI
derivative of 6T-PDI4 with a dendritic sexithiophene (6T) core [86].
6T-PDI4 had a broad absorption spectra from 400 nm to 600 nm
and a LUMO level of 4.1 eV. Using PTB7-Th as the donor material,
the 6T-PDI4 devices exhibited a PCE of 4.12%.
Yan et al. reported a series of tetrahedron-shaped PDI tetramers
(TPC-PDI4, TPSi-PDI4 and TPGe-PDI4) with the tetraphenylmethane
(TPC), tetraphenylsilane (TPSi) and tetraphenylgermane (TPGe)
central cores [87]. All of them had a sp3 atom in the middle section,
which led to a tetrahedron-shaped molecular configuration. The
results indicated that OSCs based on TPC-PDI4 and TPSi-PDI4
showed significantly better performance than TPGe-PDI4. The TPC-
PDI4 devices showed the highest PCE of 4.3% with an outstanding
Voc of 0.96 V. At the same time, Zhang et al. also used TPC as the
central core to link four PDI units and synthesized a 3D NFA of Me-
PDI4. The solution-processed OSCs based on Me-PDI4 showed a
PCE of 2.73% [88]. The TPC core was also used by Li’s group to
Fig. 5. Chemical structures of three dimensional PDI trimers.
Please cite this article in press as: Y. Duan, et al., Recent development of perylene diimide-based small molecular non-fullerene acceptors in
organic solar cells, Chin. Chem. Lett. (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cclet.2017.08.025
synthesize two novel PDI tetramers of tetra-PBI and tetra-PBI-S
[89]. Compared with tetra-PBI, tetra-PBI-S had an appropriate
LUMO level, balanced carrier mobility and favorable phase
separation when blended with PBDT-TS1, which made tetra-PBI-
S devices show a much higher PCE of 6.2% than that of tetra-PBI
devices (3.6%). Yan et al. further studied the structure-property
relationship of PDI tetramers by replacing TPC with tetraphenyl-
ethylene (TPE) and tetraphenylpyrazine (TPPz) and synthesized
another two PDI derivatives of TPE-PDI4 and TPPz-PDI4 [90,91]. The
results indicated that TPC-PDI4 had a more twisted configuration
compared to TPE-PDI4. As a result, the device based on TPC-PDI4
showed an inferior performance (PCE = 4.3%) than that of TPE-PDI4
(PCE = 5.5%). Therefore, increasing the twisting extent of the PDI
molecules (from TPE-PDI4 to TPC-PDI4) would decrease the overall
device performance. Compared to TPE-PDI4, TPPz-PDI4 had a less
crowded space, which made the twist extent of molecular
backbone reduce further. Thus, OSCs fabricated with TPPz-PDI4
exhibited a higher FF and PCE (7.1%) than those of TPC-PDI4 and
TPE-PDI4.
Cho et al. reported a novel 3D SM-NFA of SF-PDI4 based on a
spirobifluorene (SF) core [92,93]. This highly twisted core could
suppress molecular aggregation of SF-PDI4 and facilitate excitation
energy transfer. Thus, SF-PDI4 showed an intense UV–vis absorp-
tion band peaked at 531 nm, which complemented well with the
absorption bands of P4T2FBT and PV4T2FBT. Furthermore, the
comparative study revealed that replacing P4T2FBT with
PV4T2FBT could significantly increase the solar cell efficiency
due to the enhanced absorption and more favorable BHJ
morphology. The PV4T2FBT:SF-PDI4 devices had a higher Jsc of
12.02 mA/cm2 with a reasonably high Voc and FF values, giving
rise to a higher PCE of 5.98%. Importantly, the PV4T2FBT:SF-PDI4
blend exhibited a well mixed interpenetrating BHJ morphology
with well-defined nanophase separation, indicating that SF-PDI4
could formed an excellent 3D charge transport network for
efficient OSCs. Huang et al. reported another PDI tetramer of P4M4,
whose devices based on PDBT-T1:P4M4 active layer showed a PCE
of 5.71% [94]. Li et al. designed a 3D PDI derivative of PBI-pro using
porphyrin as the central core [83,95]. PBI-pro had three
characteristic absorption bands within 300–600 nm and 700–
G Model
CCLET 4174 No. of Pages 11

Y. Duan et al. / Chinese Chemical Letters xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 9

800 nm, which could perfectly complement with the absorption
profile of the polymer donor of PBDB-T. The above advantages
facilitated a high PCE of 7.4% from the related OSCs. The chemical
structures of 3D PDI tetramers are listed in Fig. 6. The related
photovoltaic parameters of the OSCs based on 3D PDI trimers and
tetramers as the acceptors are also provided in Table 2.
5. Conclusion
In this review, we briefly introduced the recent progress of
PDI-containing small molecules as the acceptor materials for non-
fullerene OSCs. PDI derivatives are attractive alternatives to
fullerenes because they have low-lying LUMO levels, high
electron mobilities, easy modification of the frontier molecular
orbital levels, inexpensive synthesis and purification on a large
scale. More importantly, they are chemically and environmentally
robust (some cases have been used as automotive paint
pigments). Regardless of above advantages, PDIs have historically
performed poor performance in BHJ solar cells. One of the main
reasons is that PDIs are strongly aggregated in the solid state due
to their rigid molecular configurations, which will form seriously
large crystallites up to micrometer scale during the solution-
process. Many efforts for minimizing the domain size of PDI
derivatives focused on three major strategies: (1) developing
monomeric PDIs by introducing large bulky groups at the imide
position and the ortho or bay positions; (2) creating twisted PDI
dimmers by inserting spacers at the ortho or bay positions, or
directly correcting two PDIs at the imide position; (3) designing
twisted PDIs with three dimensional (3D) molecular configu-
rations by different 3D central cores. Although creating twisted or
non-planar geometries seems to be a successful design strategy
for PDI-based acceptor materials, the reduced p-p stacking
feature of PDI backbone will be induced by increasing steric
repulsion, which will thus weaken the electron-transporting
capability of PDI unit to some extent. To tap into the potential of
PDIs as the NFAs, the trade-off between ideal nanophase
separation and strong p-p stacking should be properly resolved.
Many smart design strategies have already realized the high PCE
over 9% in OSCs. However, there is still a large lifting space for
improving the device performance of PDI-based acceptor materi-
als further. With the continued striving for understanding the
structure-property relationships, developing novel PDI-based

Fig. 6. Chemical structures of three dimensional PDI tetramers.

Please cite this article in press as: Y. Duan, et al., Recent development of perylene diimide-based small molecular non-fullerene acceptors in
organic solar cells, Chin. Chem. Lett. (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cclet.2017.08.025
G Model
CCLET 4174 No. of Pages 11

10 Y. Duan et al. / Chinese Chemical Letters xxx (2017) xxx–xxx

Table 2
The photovoltaic parameters of the OSCs based on three-dimensional PDI trimers and tetramers as the acceptors.

Acceptor Donor LUMO/HOMO (eV) Addictives D/A rato (w/w) Jsc (mA/cm2) Voc (V) FF (%) PCE (%) Ref.

S(TPA-PDI) PBDTTT-C-T 3.70/5.40 DIO 5% 1:1 11.92 0.88 33.6 3.32 [22]
TPA-PDI-S PDBT-T1 3.79/5.66 DIO 0.5% 1:1 9.42 1.0 59 5.66 [78]
TPA-PDI-Se PDBT-T1 3.90/5.61 DIO 0.5% 1:1 10.24 1.0 58 6.10 [78]
TPA-(T-PDI-EG)3 PBDTTT-C-T 3.80/5.60 DIO 3% 1.25:1 5.36 0.90 39 1.92 [79]
TPH-4 PDBT-T1 3.84/5.88 DIO 0.25% 1:1 12.2 0.96 67.8 8.03 [81]
TPH-5 PDBT-T1 3.82/5.86 DIO 0.25% 1:1 12.2 0.87 68.1 8.15 [81]
TPH-6 PDBT-T1 3.80/5.85 DIO 0.25% 1:1 12.2 0.98 66.7 8.05 [81]
TPH-7 PDBT-T1 3.82/5.88 DIO 0.25% 1:1 12.6 0.98 69.2 8.64 [81]
TPH-Se PDBT-T1 3.80/5.97 DIO 0.75% 01:01 12.72 1.00 72.1 9.28 [24]
B(PDI)3 PTB7-Th 3.86/6.0 CN 3% 1:1.5 13.1 0.83 53 5.65 [82]
Ta-PDI PTB7-Th 3.81/6.03 CN 0.5% 1:1 17.1 0.78 68.5 9.15 [25]
Tri-PDI PTB7-Th 3.92/5.80 DIO 1% 1:1.5 6.13 0.85 38 2.19 [83]
Fused tri-PDI PTB7-Th 3.73/5.95 DIO 1% 1:1.5 12.39 0.91 55 6.19 [83]
TPBDT PTB7-Th 3.98/5.71 DPE 8% 1:1.5 18.3 0.92 59 8.47 [84]
bTPB6 PTB7-Th 3.79/5.92 / 1:1.5 12.5 0.82 58 5.85 [85]
bTPB6-C PTB7-Th 3.75/6.21 DIO+DPE (2.5+2.5) 1:1.5 15.1 0.79 57 7.69 [85]
6T-PDI4 PTB7-Th 4.18/5.73 DIO 1% 1:2 10.69 0.82 47 4.12 [86]
TPC-PDI4 PffBT4T-2DT 3.75/6.00 / 1:1.5 9.2 0.96 49 4.3 [87]
TPSi-PDI4 PffBT4T-2DT 3.75/6.01 / 1:1.5 8.5 0.94 53 4.2 [87]
TPGe-PDI4 PffBT4T-2DT 3.68/5.94 / 1:1.5 5.0 0.92 37 1.6 [87]
Me-PDI4 PBDTTT-C-T 3.82/5.96 DIO 3% 1:1 7.83 0.77 45 2.73 [88]
Tetra-PBI PBDT-TS1 3.74/5.90 DPE 3% 1:1.5 9.65 0.95 50 3.62 [89]
Tetra-PBI-S PBDT-TS1 3.68/6.02 DPE 3% 1:1.5 13.02 0.94 39 6.17 [89]
TPE-PDI4 PTB7-Th 3.72/5.77 / 1:1.4 11.7 0.91 52 5.53 [90]
TPPz-PDI4 PffBT-T3(1,2)-2 3.76/5.86 / 1:1.5 12.7 0.993 57 7.1 [91]
SF-PDI4 PV4T2FBT 3.78/5.97 DIO 3% 1:0.8 12.11 0.90 55.83 5.98 [93]
P4N4 PBDB-T 3.69/5.97 DIO 0.5% 1:0.8 9.40 0.958 63.4 5.71 [94]
PBI-por PTB7-Th 3.65/5.36 DIO 1% 1:1 14.5 0.78 66 7.4 [95]

NFAs, choosing suitable donor materials and optimizing the
morphology of the active layer, we believe that highly efficient
PDI-based OSCs can be anticipated in the near future.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Science Foundation of
China (NSFC, Nos. 51573107, 91633301 and 21432005) and the
Foundation of State Key Laboratory of Polymer Materials Engi-
neering (No. sklpme 2017-2-04).
References
[1] Y.F. Li, Acc. Chem. Res. 45 (2012) 723–733.
[2] G. Li, R. Zhu, Y. Yang, Nat. Photonics 6 (2012) 153–161.
[3] Y.H. Liu, J.B. Zhao, Z.K. Li, et al., Nat. Commun. 5 (2014) 1–8.
[4] Y.F. Li, Chem. Asian J. 10 (2013) 2316–2328.
[5] Y.J. He, H.Y. Chen, J.H. Hou, Y.F. Li, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 132 (2010) 1377–1382.
[6] Y.J. He, G.J. Zhao, B. Peng, Y.F. Li, Adv. Funct. Mater. 20 (2010) 3383–3389.
[7] S.Q. Zhang, L. Ye, J.H. Hou, Adv. Energy Mater. 6 (2016) 1502529.
[8] J.B. Zhao, Y.K. Li, G.F. Yang, et al., Nat. Energy 1 (2016) 1–7.
[9] S.S. Li, L. Ye, W.C. Zhao, et al., Adv. Mater. 28 (2016) 9423–9429.
[10] B.B. Fan, L. Ying, Z.F. Wang, et al., Energy Environ. Sci. 10 (2017) 1243–1251.
[11] S.S. Li, H. Zhang, W.C. Zhao, et al., Adv. Energy Mater. 6 (2015) 1501991.
[12] C.D. Dou, X.J. Long, Z.C. Ding, et al., Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 55 (2016) 1436–1440.
[13] X.J. Long, Z.C. Ding, C.D. Dou, et al., Adv. Mater. 28 (2016) 6504–6508.
[14] Y.Z. Lin, J.Y. Wang, Z.G. Zhang, et al., Adv. Mater. 27 (2015) 1170–1174.
[15] G.J. Zhang, G.F. Yang, H. Yan, et al., Adv. Mater. 29 (2017) 1606054.
[16] S.X. Li, W.Q. Liu, M.M. Shi, et al., Energy Environ. Sci. 9 (2016) 604–610.
[17] H.Y. Li, Y.J. Hwang, B.A.E. Courtright, et al., Adv. Mater. 27 (2015) 3266–3272.
[18] C.W. Tang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 48 (1986) 183.
[19] Z. An, J. Yu, S.C. Jones, et al., Adv. Mater. 17 (2005) 2580–2583.
[20] C. Li, H. Wonneberger, Adv. Mater. 24 (2012) 613–636.
[21] Z.T. Liu, Y. Wu, Q. Zhang, X. Gao, J. Mater. Chem. A 4 (2016) 17604–17622.
[22] Y.Z. Lin, Y.F. Wang, J.Y. Wang, et al., Adv. Mater. 26 (2014) 5137–5142.
[23] J. Liu, S.S. Chen, D.P. Qian, et al., Nat. Energy 1 (2016) 16089.
[24] D. Meng, H.T. Fu, C.Y. Xiao, et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 138 (2016) 10184–10190.
[25] Y.W. Duan, X.P. Xu, H. Yan, et al., Adv. Mater. 29 (2017) 1605115.
[26] J.J. Dittmer, R. Lazzaroni, Ph. Leclère, et al., Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 61
(2000) 53–61.
[27] L. Schmidt-Mende, A. Fechtenkötter, K. Müllen, et al., Science 293 (2001) 1119–
1122.
[28] X.Y. Guo, L.J. Bu, Y. Zhao, et al., Thin Solid Films 517 (2009) 4654–4657.
[29] A. Sharenko, C.M. Proctor, T.S. vanderPoll, et al., Adv. Mater 25 (2013) 4403–
4406.
[30] A. Sharenko, D. Gehrig, F. Laquai, T.Q. Nguyen, Chem. Mater. 26 (2014) 4109–
4118.
[31] Y.X. Chen, X. Zhang, C.L. Zhan, J.N. Yao, Phys Status Solidi A 212 (2015) 1961–
1968.
[32] R. Singh, E. Aluicio-Sarduy, Z. Kan, et al., J. Mater. Chem. A 2 (2014) 14348–
14353.
[33] X. Zhang, Z.H. Lu, L. Ye, et al., Adv. Mater. 25 (2013) 5791–5797.
[34] X.L. Zhang, B. Jiang, X. Zhang, et al., J. Phys. Chem. C 118 (2014) 24212–24220.
[35] P.E. Hartnett, A. Timalsina, H.S.S.R. Matte, et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 136 (2014)
16345–16356.
[36] Y.H. Cai, L.J. Huo, X.B. Sun, et al., Adv. Energy Mater. 5 (2015) 1500032.
[37] X.C. Li, H.B. Wang, J. Li, et al., J. Mater. Chem. C 5 (2017) 2781–2785.
[38] X. Liu, G.P. Luo, X.Y. Cai, et al., RSC Adv. 5 (2015) 83155–83163.
[39] G.D. Sharma, P. Balraju, J.A. Mikroyannidis, M.M. Stylianakis, Sol. Energy Mater.
Sol. Cells 93 (2009) 2025–2028.
[40] G.D. Sharma, P. Suresh, J.A. Mikroyannidis, M.M. Stylianakis, J. Mater. Chem. 20
(2010) 561–567.
[41] J.A. Mikroyannidisa, P. Sureshb, G.D. Sharma, Synth. Met. 160 (2010) 932–938.
[42] D. Kotowski, S. Luzzati, G. Scavia, et al., Dyes Pigm. 120 (2015) 57–64.
[43] Z.H. Lu, X. Zhang, C.L. Zhan, et al., Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 15 (2013) 11375–
11385.
[44] X. Zhang, J.N. Yao, C.L. Zhan, Chem. Commun. 51 (2015) 1058–1061.
[45] X. Zhang, C.L. Zhan, J.N. Yao, Chem. Mater. 27 (2015) 166–173.
[46] J.Y. Wang, Y.H. Yao, S.X. Dai, et al., J. Mater. Chem. A 3 (2015) 13000–13010.
[47] J.B. Zhao, Y.K. Li, J.Q. Zhang, et al., J. Mater. Chem. A 3 (2015) 20108–20112.
[48] W.T. Hadmojo, S.Y. Nam, T.J. Shin, et al., J. Mater. Chem. A 4 (2016) 12308–
12318.
[49] Q.F. Yan, Y. Zhou, Y.Q. Zheng, et al., Chem. Sci. 4 (2013) 4389–4394.
[50] J.B. Zhao, Y.K. Li, H.R. Lin, et al., Energy Environ. Sci. 8 (2015) 520–525.
[51] S.S. Chen, G.Y. Zhang, J. Liu, et al., Adv. Mater. 29 (2017) 1604231.
[52] G.E. Park, H.J. Kim, S. Choi, et al., Chem. Commun. 52 (2016) 8873–8876.
[53] P.E. Hartnett, H.S.S.R. Matte, N.D. Eastham, et al., Chem. Sci. 7 (2016) 3543–
3555.
[54] H.L. Zhong, C.H. Wu, C.Z. Li, et al., Adv. Mater. 28 (2016) 951–958.
[55] S.X. Li, W.Q. Liu, C.Z. Li, et al., J. Mater. Chem. A 4 (2016) 14983–14987.
[56] D.L. Zhao, Q.H. Wu, Z.X. Cai, et al., Chem. Mater. 28 (2016) 1139–1146.
[57] S.M. McAfee, S. Dayneko, P. Josse, et al., Chem. Mater. 29 (2017) 1309–1314.
[58] S.M. McAfee, S.V. Dayneko, A.D. Hendsbee, et al., J. Mater. Chem. A 5 (2017)
11623–11633.
[59] Q.Q. Shi, S.Y. Zhang, J.X. Zhang, et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 138 (2016) 3946–3949.
[60] W. Jiang, L. Ye, X.G. Li, et al., Chem. Commun. 50 (2014) 1024–1026.
[61] L. Ye, W. Jiang, W.C. Zhao, et al., Small 10 (2014) 4658–4663.
[62] Y. Zang, C.Z. Li, C.C. Chueh, et al., Adv. Mater. 26 (2014) 5708–5714.
[63] C.H. Wu, C.C. Chueh, Y.Y. Xi, et al., Adv. Funct. Mater. 25 (2015) 5326–5332.
[64] J.S. Yu, Y.Y. Xi, C.C. Chueh, et al., Adv. Mater. Interfaces 3 (2016) 1600476.

Please cite this article in press as: Y. Duan, et al., Recent development of perylene diimide-based small molecular non-fullerene acceptors in
organic solar cells, Chin. Chem. Lett. (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cclet.2017.08.025
G Model
CCLET 4174 No. of Pages 11

Y. Duan et al. / Chinese Chemical Letters xxx (2017) xxx–xxx 11

[65] Y.P. Yu, F. Yang, Y.J. Ji, et al., J. Mater. Chem. C 4 (2016) 4134–4137. [81] H.T. Fu, D. Meng, X.Y. Meng, et al., J. Mater. Chem. A 5 (2017) 3475–3482.
[66] D. Sun, D. Meng, Y.H. Cai, et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 137 (2015) 11156–11162. [82] X. Li, W.Q. Liu, C.Z. Li, et al., J. Mater. Chem. A 4 (2016) 10659–10665.
[67] D. Meng, D. Sun, C.M. Zhong, et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 138 (2016) 375–380. [83] B. Wang, W.Q. Liu, H.B. Li, et al., J. Mater. Chem. A 5 (2017) 9396–9401.
[68] T. Liu, D. Meng, Y.H. Cai, et al., Adv. Sci. 3 (2016) 1600117. [84] Q.H. Wu, D.L. Zhao, A.M. Schneider, et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 138 (2016) 7248–
[69] A.D. Hendsbee, J.P. Sun, W.K. Law, et al., Chem. Mater. 28 (2016) 7098–7109. 7251.
[70] Y. Zhong, M.T. Trinh, R.S. Chen, et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 136 (2014) 15215–15221. [85] Q.H. Wu, D.L. Zhao, J.H. Yang, et al., Chem. Mater. 29 (2017) 1127–1133.
[71] Y. Zhong, M.T. Trinh, R.S. Chen, et al., Nat. Commun. 6 (2015) 8242. [86] M.H. Yi, J.D. Yi, J.K. Wang, et al., Dyes Pigm. 139 (2017) 498–508.
[72] T.J. Sisto, Y. Zhong, B.Y. Zhang, et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 139 (2017) 5648–5651. [87] Y.H. Liu, J.Y.L. Lai, S.S. Chen, et al., J. Mater. Chem. A 3 (2015) 13632–13636.
[73] C. Zhang, T. Liu, W.X. Zeng, et al., Mater. Chem. Front. 1 (2017) 749–756. [88] W.Q. Chen, X. Yang, G.K. Long, et al., J. Mater. Chem. C 3 (2015) 4698–4705.
[74] S. Rajaram, R. Shivanna, S.K. Kandappa, K.S. Narayan, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 23 [89] W. Fan, N.N. Liang, D. Meng, et al., Chem. Commun. 52 (2016) 11500–11503.
(2012) 2405–2408. [90] Y.H. Liu, C. Mu, K. Jiang, et al., Adv. Mater. 27 (2015) 1015–1020.
[75] R. Shivanna, S. Shoaee, S. Dimitrov, et al., Energy Environ. Sci. 7 (2014) 435–441. [91] H.R. Lin, S.S. Chen, H.W. Hu, et al., Adv. Mater. 28 (2016) 8546–8551.
[76] L. Ye, K. Sun, W. Jiang, et al., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 7 (2015) 9274–9280. [92] J.D. Yi, Y.L. Wang, Q. Luo, et al., Chem. Commun. 52 (2016) 1649–1652.
[77] N.N. Liang, K. Sun, Z. Zheng, et al., Adv. Energy Mater. 6 (2016) 1600060. [93] J. Lee, R. Singh, D.H. Sin, et al., Adv. Mater. 28 (2016) 69–76.
[78] Z.H. Luo, W.T. Xiong, T. Liu, et al., Org. Electron. 41 (2017) 166–172. [94] X. Liu, T. Liu, C.H. Duan, et al., J. Mater. Chem. A 5 (2017) 1713–1723.
[79] Q.C. Wu, L. Li, J.F. Hai, et al., Dyes Pigm. 132 (2016) 41–47. [95] A.D. Zhang, C. Li, F. Yang, et al., Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 56 (2017) 2694–2698.
[80] N.N. Liang, D. Meng, Z.T. Ma, et al., Adv. Energy Mater. 7 (2016) 1601664.

Please cite this article in press as: Y. Duan, et al., Recent development of perylene diimide-based small molecular non-fullerene acceptors in
organic solar cells, Chin. Chem. Lett. (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cclet.2017.08.025