MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973115734 · doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2013.07.292

How to Obtain Solderable Al/Ni:V/Ag Contacts

2013· article· ca· W1973115734 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Martin Lehr, Frank Heinemeyer, Stefan Eidelloth, Till Brendemühl, Fabian Kiefer, Daniel Münster, Anja Lohse, M. N. Berger, Nadja Braun, Rolf Brendel

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Procedia · 2013
Typearticle
Languageca
FieldEngineering
TopicSilicon and Solar Cell Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz, nukleare Sicherheit und VerbraucherschutzInstitute of Gender and HealthMinistry of Environment
KeywordsSolderabilityMaterials scienceAnnealing (glass)WettingAluminiumSputteringLayer (electronics)Electrical resistivity and conductivityEvaporationMetallurgyStack (abstract data type)Wetting layerAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Composite materialNanotechnologyThin filmChemistryElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate process sequences for obtaining solderable Al/Ni:V/Ag contacts to PERC-type crystalline Si solar cells by in-line Al evaporation. For a high cell efficiency the evaporated aluminum must be annealed at 350 °C for about 5 min. We find that annealing the Al/Ni:V/Ag metallization stack at temperatures above 150 °C destroys the solderability of the wetting layer. A solution for this problem is to first deposit the 2.5 μm Al layer by evaporation, then anneal the cell at 350 °C for 10 min, and finally sputter a double layer of Ni:V/Ag with respective thickness values of 200 nm and 25 nm. This process leads to a contact resistivity lower than 1 mΩcm2. The solderablility is proven by a peel force greater than 3 N/mm. We present a solderable PERC cell with Al/Ni:V/Ag rear side metallization and an efficiency of 18.9%.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy ProcediaSame topicSilicon and Solar Cell TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207