MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Developments of Solar Cell Materials and Fabrication Technology and their Effects on Energy Conversion Efficiency

2013· article· en· W2005339315 on OpenAlexaff
Yin Dong Yang, Paul Wu, Jason Deng, Mansoor Barati, Alex McLean

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Mechanics and Materials · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicTiO2 Photocatalysis and Solar Cells
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceCopper indium gallium selenide solar cellsCadmium telluride photovoltaicsSolar cellPhotovoltaicsPhotovoltaic systemSiliconEnergy conversion efficiencyOptoelectronicsQuantum dot solar cellSolar energyEngineering physicsCrystalline siliconGalliumEnvironmentally friendlyPlasmonic solar cellSolar cell efficiencyPolymer solar cellMetallurgyElectrical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reviews the present status and future developments of solar cell materials for photovoltaic (PV) application. The solar cell made from different materials, such as silicon with different structures, cadmium telluride (CdTe), gallium arsenide GaAs), copper indium gallium diselenide (CIGS) and polymers are compared in theoretical ability, energy conversion efficiency, production and maintenance costs as well as environmental effects. Several important strategies to improve energy efficiency, such as anti-reflective coating (ARC), multi-junction concentrator and black silicon technique that improve the light-trapping and absorption properties of solar cells, are discussed. The review results show that the most efficient solar cells achieved 50% energy conversion, whereas silicon-based PV cells can reach 27%. Today the market is dominated by crystalline silicon in multi-crystalline and mono-crystalline forms due to it being the second most abundant element on the earths crust, and its nontoxic and environmental-friendly nature compared with other materials. Development of a new process with low cost, high efficiency and environment-friendly nature to produce solar grade silicon is of significant importance for the PV industry.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.163 · 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Mechanics and MaterialsSame topicTiO2 Photocatalysis and Solar CellsFrench-language works237,207