MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969297479 · doi:10.1117/12.2038649

Silicon solar cell enhancement by plasmonic silver nanocubes

2014· article· en· W1969297479 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan Veenkamp, Si‐Jing Ding, Ian H. Smith, W. N. Ye

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThin-Film Transistor Technologies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceSiliconSolar cellAbsorption (acoustics)Layer (electronics)FabricationOptoelectronicsNanoparticleParticle (ecology)Plasmonic solar cellNanotechnologySubstrate (aquarium)Quantum dot solar cellSolar cell efficiencyRange (aeronautics)Monocrystalline siliconComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our paper presents a detailed numerical simulation and experimental study of the efficiency enhancement gained by optimizing metal nanocubes incorporated on the surface of silicon solar cells. We investigate the effects of nanoparticle size, surface coverage and spacer layer thickness on solar absorption and cell efficiency. The fabrication of nanocubes on solar cells is also presented, with the trends observed in simulation verified through experimental data. Testing reveals that nanocubes show worse performance than nanospheres when sitting directly on the silicon substrate; however, enhancement exceeds that of nanospheres when particles are placed on an optimized spacer layer of SiO2, for reasonable surface coverages of up to 25%. Our analysis shows that for a large range of particle sizes, 60 - 100nm, enhancement in light absorption remains at a high level, near the optimum. This suggests a high level of fabrication tolerance which is important due to the chemical growth mechanism used for nanocube synthesis, as it consistently produces nanocubes in that range. Further, we note that efficiency enhancement by nanocubes is influenced by particle size, surface coverage, and spacer layer thickness much differently than that for a spherical geometry, thus our study focuses on the optimization of the nanocube parameters. We show that 80nm nanocubes on a 25nm SiO2 spacer layer realize ~ 24% enhancement in light absorption compared to an identical particle-free cell. Finally, we present both the numerical and experimental results for silicon solar cells coated with nanocube arrays.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicThin-Film Transistor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207