MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009449769 · doi:10.1115/1.4023517

Design Enhancements for High Performance Dye-Sensitized Solar Cells

2013· article· en· W2009449769 on OpenAlexafffund
K. P. S. Parmar, A. Kianimanesh, Theodor Freiheit, S. S. Park

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Solar Energy Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicTiO2 Photocatalysis and Solar Cells
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanada School of Energy and Environment
KeywordsDye-sensitized solar cellMaterials scienceSolar cellPhotovoltaic systemOptoelectronicsRenewable energyEnergy conversion efficiencySolar energyAnodeElectrolyteOpticsElectrodeElectrical engineeringChemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the abundance of solar energy, solar cells are considered as a renewable source of energy to replace conventional fossil fuels. Compared to the silicon-based photovoltaic (PV) cell, the next generation dye-sensitized solar cell (DSSC) offers the advantages of increased absorption of visible light, high efficiency potential, less energy intensive and lower-cost manufacturing process, colorable design, and lightweight material options. DSSC is a photo-electrochemical system that is based on a photosensitive dye-sensitized semiconductor (mostly titanium dioxide, TiO2) anode and an iodide-based electrolyte. In order to improve the performance of current DSSC systems, we proposed various design improvement schemes through the use of TiO2 nanotube (TONT) arrays and a multistack design of single cells. Through design modifications, approximately 38% improvement in the performance compared to conventional DSSC is reported. Moreover, optical enhancements to increase the amount of incident light on the cell were applied to DSSCs to further improve its performance by application of Fresnel lenses on top of the DSSC and the use of light reflecting material such as Aluminum on the rear side of the cell. The polarization curves for different designs were measured using a potentiostat and the performance of each cell was compared. Optical enhancements improved the power output by 27% compared to normal cells. A semi-empirical DSSC model was also developed based on the experimental results and the change in the performance of different designs was examined. Based on the model, the necessary conditions for maximum performance could be determined.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.181
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Solar Energy EngineeringSame topicTiO2 Photocatalysis and Solar CellsFrench-language works237,207