“…The judicious choice of the ligands bonded to Ru(II) can tune the energy of the excited state, − the excited-state lifetime, ,, and the absorption energy of the complex, − while overcoming the limitation imposed by the energy gap law , on the excited-state lifetime at the same time. Several strategies have been adopted by various groups to red-shift the absorption and emission of Ru(II)-heteroleptic complexes and to prolong their excited-state lifetimes; for example, (a) introduction of coplanar electron-withdrawing aromatic moiety containing bidiazine ligands bearing two-ring N heteroatoms, − thereby stabilizing the 3 MLCT state, (b) functionalization of bpy with various substituents in order to lower the LUMO, , (c) introduction of an organic chromophore to establish an equilibrium between the 3 MLCT and the organic chromophore triplet 3 LC states, (d) introduction of fused polyaromatic systems (benzoeilatin, 952 nm; isoeilatin, 994 nm; dipyridophenazine, 790 nm), and (e) the formation of oligonuclear complexes with additional electron-withdrawing metal ions. , In general, the two principal approaches toward red-emitting Ru(II) complexes are (i) the incorporation of a better acceptor ligand, , in place of one bpy in Ru(bpy) 3 2+ , thereby decreasing the energy of the LUMO of the new Ru(bpy) 2 (acceptor) 2+ species, and (ii) introduction of a better donor ligand that functions by raising the energy of the HOMO in the new Ru(bpy) 2 (donor) 2+ species …”