Acridine orange as a biosensitive photovoltaic material
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acridine orange (AO), a biosensitive molecule that is customarily used for labeling nucleic acids including DNA and RNA, is here investigated as a cost effective, water soluble, and photoactive material for the fabrication of potentially biosensitive organic photovoltaics. The electronic energy levels of AO are determined using Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy (KPFM) and UV-Visible spectroscopy. The effect of anticrystallization agents, as well as low-temperature annealing, on the work function of AO is investigated: amorphous AO films are shown to possess a significantly higher work function than microcrystalline AO films and the work function also increases by annealing. Photo-induced processes in AO films are investigated by considering the changes of the KPFM signal under illumination. We demonstrate that acridine orange is able to photogenerate electron-hole pairs at rates comparable to the most commonly used solar-grade photovoltaic materials, including polythiophenes. In addition, the effect of the morphology of different types of AO thin films spun from different solvents is studied in bilayer photovoltaic devices fabricated from stacks of AO and phenyl-C61-butyric acid methyl ester thin films.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".