The combination of two p‐doped layers for improving the hole current of organic light‐emitting diodes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The combination of MoO3‐doped 4,4‐N,N‐bis [N‐1‐naphthyl‐N‐phenyl‐amino]biphenyl (NPB:MoO3) and 4,4′‐N,N′‐dicarbazole‐biphenyl (CBP:MoO3) was used to enhance the hole conduction in organic light‐emitting diodes (OLEDs). It is found that the OLED using NPB:MoO3 10 nm/CBP:MoO3 5 nm showed a much increased current density than the one using NPB:MoO3 5 nm/CBP:MoO3 5 nm at a given voltage larger than 4 V, mainly because the hole transport barrier across the p‐doped heterojunction in the former device became smaller than that in the latter device with the driving voltage increasing, despite the fact that the 10‐nm NPB:MoO3 in the former device caused more Ohmic loss than the 5‐nm one in the latter device. As a result of the higher conductivity of NPB:MoO3 than that of CBP:MoO3, the OLED using the combination of 15‐nm NPB:MoO3 and 5‐nm CBP:MoO3 showed significantly increased performance than the one using the single 20‐nm CBP:MoO3. We provide a useful way of advancing the OLEDs toward the practical applications in general lighting and flat‐panel displays.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".