Concerted Emission and Local Potentiometry of Light-Emitting Electrochemical Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the operation of polymer light-emitting electrochemical cells (LECs) by combining scanning Kelvin probe microscopy with in situ imaging of the electroluminescence and photoluminescence on planar LECs. By combining these techniques on the same device in the same apparatus we directly map the relationship between the spatial distribution of electroluminescence and the local potential profile across the device. We find that the electroluminescence is always associated with a region of potential drop in LECs made with poly[2-methoxy-5-(3',7'-dimethyl-octyloxy)-p-phenylenevinylene] (MDMO-PPV), poly(ethylene oxide)(PEO), and potassium trifluoromethanesulfonate. Nevertheless, depending on the electrode metal used, we also find significant potential drops at or near the electrode/organic interfaces. We study the effects of using different electrodes and show that both the electroluminescence and potential profiles are strongly dependent on the electrode work function for thin junctions operated at low potentials. These results indicate injection barriers can affect the operation of LECs even in the presence of doping.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".