Lei Sun, Michael G. Campbell, and Mircea Dinca · Angewandte Chemie International Edition · 2016
Review synthetic and electronic design strategies for porous MOFs with permanent porosity and long-range charge transport, along with key electrical measurements and selected applications.
The review’s argument is preserved as a navigable set of section summaries.
Builds the physical framework: conductivity depends on carrier density and mobility; carrier creation depends on low activation energy/redox matching; mobility depends on hopping or band transport and orbital overlap.
Relevance: Core · p. 3567 · General Design Principles and Concerns
Reviews through-bond, through-space and 2D pi-conjugated experimental families, tying material chemistry to reported conductivity, mobility, porosity and applications.
Relevance: Core · p. 3570 · Conductive MOFs: Experimental Approaches
Frames conductive porous MOFs as a recent development after decades of mostly insulating MOF chemistry; defines exclusions for nonporous coordination polymers and ionic/proton conductors.
Relevance: Core · p. 3567 · Introduction
Explains conductivity, mobility, activation energy and band-gap measurements, with strong caveats about contacts, morphology, atmosphere, temperature and method comparability.
Relevance: Core · p. 3569 · Measurement Techniques
Summarises Table 1 and highlights unresolved mechanism assignment, missing mobility/activation metrics, inconsistent measurements, and need for theory and devices.
Relevance: Core · p. 3576 · Outlook
Classification systems are attributed to this review and are not treated as a global material registry.
A special through-bond class of stacked honeycomb 2D MOFs with square-planar late-transition-metal nodes and extended in-plane pi conjugation.
Categories: catecholate HHTP frameworks · dithiolene BHT/HTTP frameworks · imine HITP frameworks
p. 3575 · 2 D pi-Conjugated MOFs
The review decomposes conductivity into carrier density and carrier mobility, making both necessary design targets for conductive MOFs.
Categories: charge density · charge mobility · electrons · holes
p. 3567 · General Design Principles and Concerns
The review organises conductive MOF design around through-bond orbital overlap, through-space noncovalent overlap and guest-induced carriers/pathways.
Categories: through-bond · through-space · guest-assisted charge transfer
p. 3568 · General Design Principles and Concerns
Conductivity values are not directly comparable unless morphology and method are specified; pellets can underestimate intrinsic conductivity because of boundaries and orientation averaging.
Categories: pressed pellets · polycrystalline films · single-domain films · single crystals
p. 3569 · Conductivity Measurements
Hopping involves localised carriers moving between sites; band transport involves delocalised carriers, lower effective mass and typically higher mobility.
Categories: hopping transport · band transport
p. 3568 · General Design Principles and Concerns
Review-defined families retain their representative materials and conduction descriptions.
2D honeycomb dithiolene MOFs based on BHT or HTTP sulfur-donor ligands with Ni, Cu, Pd or Pt nodes.
Conduction: Sulfur donor conjugation can deliver very high film and microflake conductivities, with doping/oxidation and morphology strongly affecting values.
Representative materials: Ni3(BHT)2 · Cu3(BHT)2 · Pd3(BHT)2 · Pt3(HTTP)2
Nodes / linkers: Ni · Cu · Pd · Pt · benzenehexathiol · hexathiotriphenylene
p. 3575 · 2 D pi-Conjugated MOFs
M2(DOBDC) and M2(DSBDC) frameworks with infinite metal-oxygen or metal-sulfur chains used to test redox matching and metal-centre effects.
Conduction: Metal-sulfur replacement and FeII minority-spin carriers are interpreted as improving hopping through chain SBUs, though bands remain narrow.
Representative materials: Mn2(DSBDC) · Fe2(DSBDC) · Mn2(DOBDC) · Fe2(DOBDC)
Nodes / linkers: MnII · FeII · DOBDC · DSBDC
p. 3571 · Through-Bond Approach
3D porous Fe(1,2,3-triazolate)2 network with continuous Fe-N connectivity and short Fe-Fe distances.
Conduction: Charges likely hop between FeII centres; the review flags unresolved reasons for relatively high conductivity.
Representative materials: Fe(1,2,3-triazolate)2
Nodes / linkers: FeII · 1,2,3-triazolate
p. 3572 · Through-Bond Approach
2D honeycomb MOFs from HHTP or HITP ligands and late transition metals.
Conduction: Extended in-plane conjugation and ligand oxidation give high conductivity; HITP films/pellets enable device demonstrations.
Representative materials: Cu3(HHTP)2 · Ni3(HITP)2 · Cu3(HITP)2
Nodes / linkers: CoII · NiII · CuII · HHTP · HITP
p. 3576 · 2 D pi-Conjugated MOFs
Layered indium isophthalate MOFs used to compare pi-stacked versus non-pi-stacked structures in FET devices.
Conduction: A structure with interlayer pi-pi stacking showed FET mobility while a related non-stacked MOF showed no measurable mobility.
Representative materials: [In(isophthalate)2]- layered MOF
Nodes / linkers: InIII · isophthalate derivatives
p. 3574 · Through-Space Approach
Early 3D frameworks built from Cu(pyrazine) sheets connected by redox-active metal dithiolene units.
Conduction: Likely through Cu(pyrazine) sheets and redox-active dithiolene units; iodine doping increases charge density in the Ni analogue.
Representative materials: Cu[Cu(pdt)2] · Cu[Ni(pdt)2] · I2-doped Cu[Ni(pdt)2]
Nodes / linkers: CuII · NiII · 2,3-pyrazinedithiolate · metal bis(dithiolene)
p. 3571 · Through-Bond Approach
Guest-modified Cu3(BTC)2 in which TCNQ bridges open Cu sites and creates host-guest charge-transfer pathways.
Conduction: Conductivity increases via Cu-TCNQ linkages, partial charge transfer and holes as majority carriers, but porosity decreases substantially.
Representative materials: TCNQ@Cu3(BTC)2 · Cu3(BTC)2
Nodes / linkers: CuII paddlewheels · BTC · TCNQ guest
p. 3573 · Through-Bond Approach
M2(TTFTB) frameworks with pi-stacked tetrathiafulvalene columns running alongside metal carboxylate SBUs.
Conduction: Through-space S...S contacts and partial TTF oxidation support mobility/conductivity; cation radius tunes stack distance.
Representative materials: Zn2(TTFTB) · Mn2(TTFTB) · Co2(TTFTB) · Cd2(TTFTB)
Nodes / linkers: MnII · CoII · ZnII · CdII · tetrathiafulvalene tetrabenzoate
p. 3573 · Through-Space Approach
Review-level synthesis principles remain separate from primary-study recipes.
Create stacked honeycomb frameworks from ortho-disubstituted N, O or S donor ligands and square-planar late-transition-metal nodes.
Claimed effects: Produces the most conductive MOFs known in this review, with potential band transport within 2D sheets.
Controlling variables: donor atom · metal node · ligand oxidation level · stacking mode · film or flake morphology
Representative materials: Ni3(HITP)2 · Cu3(BHT)2 · Ni3(BHT)2 · Cu3(HHTP)2
Caveat: Inter-sheet stacking remains uncontrolled in many cases and affects out-of-plane transport.
p. 3575 · 2 D pi-Conjugated MOFs
Use films, microflakes or device-compatible samples to access higher/intrinsic conductivity and demonstrate sensing or transistor functions.
Claimed effects: Enables van der Pauw/FET measurements and first chemiresistive sensing demonstrations.
Controlling variables: film density · grain boundaries · domain size · contact method · ambient exposure
Representative materials: Ni3(HITP)2 films · Cu3(HITP)2 sensors · Cu3(BHT)2 films · Ni3(BHT)2 microflakes
Caveat: Device data can be morphology- and contact-dependent and should not be mixed with pellet values without context.
p. 3576 · 2 D pi-Conjugated MOFs
Insert redox-active guests into pores to bridge SBUs and create charge-transfer interactions with the framework.
Claimed effects: Can turn an insulating MOF into a conductor through new host-guest pathways and partial charge transfer.
Controlling variables: guest loading · host open metal sites · redox matching · pore occlusion
Representative materials: TCNQ@Cu3(BTC)2
Caveat: Guest insertion can substantially reduce surface area and may limit applications requiring open porosity.
p. 3573 · Through-Bond Approach
Use metal ions or ligands with loosely bound electrons to increase charge density and provide low-energy charge-transfer routes.
Claimed effects: Improves carrier density and can raise conductivity when the framework also supplies orbital overlap.
Controlling variables: metal oxidation state · ligand redox activity · metal-ligand energy alignment
Representative materials: Cu[Cu(pdt)2] · Cu[Ni(pdt)2] · I2-doped Cu[Ni(pdt)2]
Caveat: Doping or redox activity does not by itself prove band or hopping mechanism.
p. 3571 · Through-Bond Approach
Replace hard oxygen linkages with softer sulfur donors or choose metals with accessible minority-spin carriers to improve orbital energy matching.
Claimed effects: Metal-sulfur chains and FeII centres can increase conductivity relative to oxygen/Mn analogues.
Controlling variables: donor atom electronegativity · metal d-electron configuration · chain SBU composition
Representative materials: Fe2(DSBDC) · Fe2(DOBDC) · Mn2(DSBDC)
Caveat: Band calculations still suggest narrow bands and hopping-dominated transport in these examples.
p. 3571 · Through-Bond Approach
Use rigid MOF architecture to hold electroactive ligands at close noncovalent contact distances.
Claimed effects: Supports charge mobility comparable to organic semiconductors and can tune conductivity through stack distances.
Controlling variables: S...S or pi-pi distance · stack geometry · metal cation radius · ligand radical character
Representative materials: M2(TTFTB) · [In(isophthalate)2]-
Caveat: Metal carboxylate chains may not contribute directly; packing and morphology still matter.
p. 3574 · Through-Space Approach
These are the review authors’ synthesis, not newly measured results.
Planar 2D pi-conjugated MOFs are described as the most conductive MOFs known at the time of the review.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: This is as of the review publication and note-added-in-proof context.
p. 3575 · 2 D pi-Conjugated MOFs
Deriving fundamental band gaps from activation energies or optical absorption can be misleading for doped MOFs and excitonic materials.
Evidence basis: review_reasoning
Caveat: UPS/IPES are presented as more direct but less common approaches.
p. 3570 · Activation-Energy and Band-Gap Measurements
Band transport is presented as the ultimate target for highest conductivity because charge delocalisation tends to give higher mobility than hopping.
Evidence basis: review_reasoning
Caveat: The review later warns that few conductive MOFs have definitive mechanism evidence.
p. 3568 · General Design Principles and Concerns
Computational screening is expected to become important for identifying host-guest pairs that become conductive upon guest insertion.
Evidence basis: single_reference
Caveat: The review cites predicted candidates rather than validated examples.
p. 3573 · Through-Bond Approach
Conductive MOF design must address both carrier density and mobility; high values of only one parameter are insufficient.
Evidence basis: review_reasoning
Caveat: Equation-based physical framing rather than a material-specific measurement.
p. 3567 · General Design Principles and Concerns
Cu[Cu(pdt)2] is interpreted as likely conducting through Cu(pyrazine) sheets and dithiolene units, with CuII unpaired electrons increasing charge density.
Evidence basis: single_reference
Caveat: The review explicitly notes charge hopping via dithiolene units cannot be ruled out.
p. 3571 · Through-Bond Approach
Replacing MnII with FeII in DOBDC/DSBDC analogues introduces minority-spin carriers and greatly increases conductivity, making metal identity a key design variable.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: Review notes these systems are still better described by hopping because calculated bands are narrow.
p. 3572 · Through-Bond Approach
High bulk conductivity in HITP-based 2D MOFs enabled early MOF chemiresistive sensors, with metal-node choice affecting ammonia response.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: The source of differential response was unknown in the review.
p. 3576 · 2 D pi-Conjugated MOFs
Iodine exposure of Cu[Ni(pdt)2] is interpreted as partial oxidation of the framework, not conduction through iodine guests, increasing conductivity by four orders of magnitude.
Evidence basis: single_reference
Caveat: The argument relies on the review's interpretation of small iodine loading and redox activity.
p. 3571 · Through-Bond Approach
Conductivity comparisons require method, morphology, atmosphere, temperature and light exposure context; ideal intrinsic comparisons use four-probe single-crystal or van der Pauw single-domain-film measurements.
Evidence basis: review_reasoning
Caveat: Ideal conditions may be experimentally infeasible for some MOFs.
p. 3570 · Conductivity Measurements
The intended design pathway in a MOF need not match the operative transport mechanism, and assigning hopping or band models is premature for most examples.
Evidence basis: review_reasoning
Caveat: This is the review's central interpretive warning.
p. 3569 · General Design Principles and Concerns
TRMC and FET mobility measurements should not be used interchangeably because they probe different length scales, fields and current regimes.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: Both methods remain useful for different questions.
p. 3570 · Charge-Mobility Measurements
Most conventional MOFs are poor electrical conductors because hard metal ions and redox-inactive ligands do not provide low-energy pathways or free carriers.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: This is a review-level generalisation, not a universal statement about every MOF.
p. 3567 · Introduction
Pressed pellets are accessible but can mask anisotropy and underestimate intrinsic conductivity because of grain boundaries and random crystallite orientation.
Evidence basis: review_reasoning
Caveat: Pellet values can still be meaningful for order-of-magnitude comparisons.
p. 3569 · Conductivity Measurements
For 2D MOFs, intra-sheet transport may dominate, but stacking geometry controls inter-sheet transport and remains largely uncontrolled.
Evidence basis: review_reasoning
Caveat: Empirical donor-atom trends are suggested but not established as design rules.
p. 3575 · 2 D pi-Conjugated MOFs
Even among established conductive MOFs, many charge mobility, activation energy and conductivity measurements remain missing or inconsistently measured.
Evidence basis: review_reasoning
Caveat: Based on Table 1 and the authors' synthesis of the field through early 2016.
p. 3577 · Outlook
TCNQ infiltration of HKUST-1 illustrates guest-created charge pathways and charge transfer, but also a major porosity penalty.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: The value is specific to this host-guest system and loading.
p. 3573 · Through-Bond Approach
Theoretical electronic-structure calculations are important for understanding and predicting conductive MOF properties, despite cost from large unit cells.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: The review urges collaboration with theoreticians rather than replacing experiments.
p. 3577 · Outlook
In M2(TTFTB), conductivity correlates with metal cation radius through shorter S...S contacts and improved TTF orbital overlap rather than metal-carboxylate chain transport.
Evidence basis: multi_reference
Caveat: Correlation is review interpretation of series trends.
p. 3574 · Through-Space Approach
Every row remains visibly secondary and links to a primary dossier only where the mapping is verified.
| Material | Property | Reported value | Context and quality | Primary evidence | Review source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SecondaryCd2(TTFTB) | electrical conductivity | 2.9 x 10-4 S cm-1 | single crystal, two-probe, room temperature, ambient conditions Table · Exact Reported | research_0353 | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryCu3(BHT)2 | hole mobility | 99 cm2 V-1 s-1 | FET; Table 1 also reports electron mobility 116 cm2 V-1 s-1 Table · Exact Reported | research_0006 | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryCu3(BHT)2 | electrical conductivity | 1580 S cm-1 | thin film, four-probe, room temperature, measured in vacuum Table · Exact Reported | research_0006 | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryCu[Cu(pdt)2] | electrical conductivity | 6 x 10-4 S cm-1 | measurement method not reported in Table 1; 300 K in text Table · Exact Reported | research_0201 | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryCu3(HITP)2 | electrical conductivity | 0.2 S cm-1 | pellet, two-probe, room temperature, ambient conditions Table · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryCu[Ni(pdt)2] (I2-doped) | electrical conductivity | 1 x 10-4 S cm-1 | film, two-probe; N2/I2 vapour flow footnote Table · Exact Reported | research_0203 | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| Secondary(NBu4)2Fe2(dhbq)3 | electrical conductivity | 0.16 S cm-1 | pressed pellet, two-probe; note added in proof Table · Exact Reported | research_0186 | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryFe2(DSBDC) | electrical conductivity | 3.9 x 10-6 S cm-1 | pellet, two-probe, 297 K, N2 or Ar; M2(DEBDC)(DMF)2.xDMF footnote Table · Exact Reported | research_0063 | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryFe(1,2,3-triazolate)2 | electrical conductivity | 7.7 x 10-5 S cm-1 | pressed pellet, four-probe, room temperature, measured in vacuum Table · Exact Reported | research_0325 | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| Secondary[In(isophthalate)2]- | charge mobility | 4.6 x 10-3 cm2 V-1 s-1 | FET, ambient conditions Table · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryMn2(DSBDC) | charge mobility | 0.01, 0.02 cm2 V-1 s-1 | TRMC/TOF; activated and methanol-exchanged samples in footnotes Table · Range | research_0011 | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryNi3(BHT)2 | electrical conductivity | 160 S cm-1 | neutral microflake, van der Pauw, measured in vacuum Table · Exact Reported | research_0361 | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryNi3(BHT)2 | electrical conductivity | 0.15 S cm-1 | pellet, two-probe, measured in vacuum; Na3/4[Ni3(BHT)2] footnote in Table 1 Table · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryNi3(HITP)2 | electrical conductivity | 40 S cm-1 | film, van der Pauw, room temperature, ambient conditions Table · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryNi3(HITP)2 | electrical conductivity | 2 S cm-1 | pellet, two-probe, ambient conditions Table · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryNNU-27 | electrical conductivity | 1.3 x 10-3 S cm-1 | single crystal, two-probe; note added in proof Table · Exact Reported | research_0191 | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryPd3(BHT)2 | electrical conductivity | 2.8 x 10-2 S cm-1 | film, four-probe Table · Exact Reported | No verified corpus mapping | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryPt3(HTTP)2 | electrical conductivity | 10-6 S cm-1 | pellet, two-probe; as-synthesised, activated and I2-treated samples all approximately this value Table · Approximate | No verified corpus mapping | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryTCNQ@Cu3(BTC)2 | BET surface area | 214 m2 g-1 | 77 K N2 adsorption; after TCNQ incorporation Table · Exact Reported | research_0088 | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryTCNQ@Cu3(BTC)2 | electrical conductivity | 0.07 S cm-1 | film, four-probe, room temperature Table · Exact Reported | research_0088 | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
| SecondaryZn2(TTFTB) | charge mobility | 0.2 cm2 V-1 s-1 | TRMC/TOF Table · Exact Reported | research_0030 | p. 3577 · Outlook · Table 1 |
Open questions are presented as review-author priorities, not conclusions from the primary database.
Predicted exotic and device properties require reliable access to single- or few-layer sheets with large domain size.
Proposed direction: Develop general synthetic procedures for large-domain 2D conductive MOF sheets.
p. 3576 · 2 D pi-Conjugated MOFs
Eclipsed versus staggered stacking modes in 2D MOFs are not yet controllably designed, though they affect inter-sheet transport.
Proposed direction: Develop synthetic control over stacking geometry and relate it to anisotropic transport.
p. 3575 · 2 D pi-Conjugated MOFs
Electrocatalysis, energy storage, thermoelectrics and other applications remain underexplored relative to the new conductivity levels in 2D MOFs.
Proposed direction: Demonstrate MOF-based electrical/electrochemical devices that function without conductive additives.
p. 3577 · Outlook
Host-guest charge-transfer pairs need systematic discovery and validation.
Proposed direction: Use computational screening followed by experimental testing of TCNQ-like infiltrated MOFs.
p. 3573 · Through-Bond Approach
Reported conductivity values use inconsistent measurement techniques and conditions, making comparisons difficult.
Proposed direction: Report morphology, contacts, atmosphere, temperature, illumination and method; pursue rigorous single-crystal or single-domain-film measurements where possible.
p. 3577 · Outlook
For most conductive MOFs, there is little direct experimental evidence identifying whether hopping or band transport is operative.
Proposed direction: Use targeted transport experiments and theory before assigning mechanisms.
p. 3569 · General Design Principles and Concerns
Many established conductive MOFs lack reported activation energies, charge mobilities or even conductivities for device contexts.
Proposed direction: Complete basic transport property matrices for established materials before relying on device claims.
p. 3577 · Outlook
Charge mobility measurements are exceedingly few, despite their importance for electrical devices.
Proposed direction: Apply TRMC, FET, Hall, TOF and SCLC methods more systematically while keeping method distinctions clear.
p. 3570 · Charge-Mobility Measurements
Mappings show which printed review references have a verified counterpart in the frozen primary corpus.
| Reference | Study | Role and context | Corpus mapping |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ref. 102014 | Title unavailable | review_contextprior conductive MOF review context | Unmapped |
| Ref. 122014 | Title unavailable | review_contextreview's interpretation of why typical MOFs are insulating | Unmapped |
| Ref. 182014 | Title unavailable | review_contextsolid-state band transport background used by the review | Unmapped |
| Ref. 192014 | Title unavailable | review_contextsemiconductor activation-energy framing | Unmapped |
| Ref. 202011 | Title unavailable | review_contexthopping versus band transport background | Unmapped |
| Ref. 221971 | Title unavailable | review_contextthrough-bond/through-space design language | Unmapped |
| Ref. 232005 | Title unavailable | review_contextmeasurement-method reference for conductivity geometry | Unmapped |
| Ref. 262012 | Title unavailable | review_contextTRMC/TOF mobility method context | Unmapped |
| Ref. 282015 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkrecord Cu3(BHT)2 2D MOF benchmark | research_0006 |
| Ref. 362009 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkearly Cu[Cu(pdt)2] conductive MOF example | research_0201 |
| Ref. 372010 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkCu[Ni(pdt)2] porous analogue and I2 doping | research_0203 |
| Ref. 502013 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkMn2(DSBDC) metal-sulfur chain mobility example | research_0011 |
| Ref. 522015 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkDSBDC/DOBDC redox matching comparison | research_0063 |
| Ref. 532012 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkFe(1,2,3-triazolate)2 benchmark | research_0325 |
| Ref. 562014 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkTCNQ@Cu3(BTC)2 guest-induced conductivity | research_0088 |
| Ref. 602015 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkcomputational screening of TCNQ host-guest pairs | Unmapped |
| Ref. 722012 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkfirst TTF-based through-space MOF examples | research_0030 |
| Ref. 732015 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkexpanded M2(TTFTB) conductivity series | research_0353 |
| Ref. 752014 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarklayered In isophthalate FET mobility example | Unmapped |
| Ref. 802013 | Title unavailable | review_context2D conjugated MOF concept background | Unmapped |
| Ref. 822012 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkHHTP catecholate 2D MOF family | Unmapped |
| Ref. 832013 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkNi3(BHT)2 first dithiolene 2D MOF | Unmapped |
| Ref. 842014 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkNi3(BHT)2 microflake conductivity | research_0361 |
| Ref. 852015 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkPd3(BHT)2 analogue benchmark | Unmapped |
| Ref. 862014 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkPt3(HTTP)2 2D MOF benchmark | Unmapped |
| Ref. 892014 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkNi3(HITP)2 and Cu3(HITP)2 conductive 2D MOFs | Unmapped |
| Ref. 902015 | Title unavailable | transport_benchmarkCu3(HITP)2 chemiresistive sensing application | research_0002 |
| Ref. 952015 | 10.1021/jacs.5b1038510.1021/jacs.5b10385 | transport_benchmarknote-added dhbq Fe MOF benchmark | research_0186 |
| Ref. 962016 | 10.1039/c5cc09065b10.1039/c5cc09065b | transport_benchmarknote-added NNU-27 benchmark | research_0191 |
| Ref. 1002013 | Title unavailable | review_contexttheoretical electronic-structure role | Unmapped |
| Ref. 1012014 | Title unavailable | review_contexttheoretical electronic-structure role | Unmapped |