MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030016646 · doi:10.1063/1.1320459

Investigation of the sites of dark spots in organic light-emitting devices

2000· article· en· W2030016646 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Letters · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOrganic Light-Emitting Diodes Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityXerox (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCathodeNucleationMaterials scienceSpotsAnodeLuminescenceOptoelectronicsChemical physicsChemistryElectrode

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Poor environmental stability has been a major concern for organic light-emitting devices. Exposure to ambient conditions leads to the formation of nonemissive areas (dark spots) that result in a decrease in device luminescence. Although a number of mechanisms for the formation of dark spots have been proposed, the causes underlying their initiation, and their nucleation sites are still far from being clear. In this study, optical microscopy is used to investigate the sites of dark spots of devices in which the original cathodes are peeled off and replaced by newer cathodes. Results confirm that the growth of dark spots occurs primarily due to cathode delamination. The growth of dark spots is also associated with changes in the organic layers, especially at the organic/cathode interface. Results also suggest that the nucleation of dark spots takes place at the organic/cathode interface and originates during the deposition of the cathode. On the other hand, both the anode and the hole transport layer do not appear to play a role in the formation of dark spots.

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.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.189 · 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