MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037003802 · doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2015.03.016

Efficient tool flow for 3D photovoltaic modelling

2015· article· en· W2037003802 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tasmiat Rahman, Kristel Fobelets

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Physics Communications · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topicsolar cell performance optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilQueen's UniversityImperial College London
KeywordsComputer scienceInterfacingWorkstationMATLABFortranScripting languagePhotovoltaic systemComputational scienceOperating systemComputer hardwareElectrical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Performance predictions and optimisation strategies in current nanotechnology-based photovoltaic (PV) require simulation tools that can efficiently and accurately compute optical and electrical performance parameters of intricate 3D geometrical structures. Due to the complexity of each type of simulation it is often the case that a single package excels in either optical or electrical modelling, and the other remains a bottleneck. In this work, an efficient tool flow is described in order to combine the highly effective optical simulator Lumerical with the excellent fabrication and electrical simulation capability of Sentaurus. Interfacing between the two packages is achieved through tool command language and Matlab, offering a fast and accurate electro-optical characteristics of nano-structured PV devices. Program summary Program title: Interfacing_Lumerical_Sentaurus Catalogue identifier: AEWK_v1_0 Program summary URL: http://cpc.cs.qub.ac.uk/summaries/AEWK_v1_0.html Program obtainable from: CPC Program Library, Queen’s University, Belfast, N. Ireland Licensing provisions: Standard CPC licence, http://cpc.cs.qub.ac.uk/licence/licence.html No. of lines in distributed program, including test data, etc.: 4525 No. of bytes in distributed program, including test data, etc.: 23729 Distribution format: tar.gz Programming language: TCL, Matlab, Lumerical FDTD Solutions Version 8.7.3, TCAD Sentaurus Version j-2014.09. Computer: A multi-core, high ram workstation is recommended for running Lumerical Solutions and TCAD Sentaurus. The scripts provided here were run on a HPZ820 workstation with 2 X Intel Xeon E5-2680 2.70Ghz processors and 128GB DDR3-1600 RAM. Operating system: Linux. Number of processors used: Matlab scripts can be parallel processed. The scripts have been tested on 16 CPUs (32 Threads). RAM: For the TCL files, minimal RAM is needed. For the matlab script, it depends on the structure. The scripts have been tested using an upper limit of 128 GB. Classification: 4, 6, 18. Nature of problem: Create a tool flow that models complex fabrication techniques , as well as accurate and efficient optical and electrical simulations for photovoltaic simulations. Solution method: Code is provided to interface between Lumerical and Sentaurus using TCL and Matlab script. Running time: Depends on structure complexity and number of processors used.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Methods
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinglow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Methods
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Simulation or modelinglow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.006

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Physics CommunicationsSame topicsolar cell performance optimizationFrench-language works237,207