MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048020748 · doi:10.1364/ao.47.00c251

Optical modeling of organic solar cells based on CuPc and C_60

2008· article· en· W2048020748 on OpenAlexaff
Florent Monestier, Jean‐Jacques Simon, Philippe Torchio, Ludovic Escoubas, Bernard Ratier, Wassim Hojeij, Bruno Lucas, André Moliton, Michel Cathelinaud, Christophe Defranoux, F. Flory

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Optics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOrganic Electronics and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsCegep de Saint Jerome
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPEDOT:PSSMaterials scienceOrganic solar cellExcitonCurrent densityShort circuitOptoelectronicsDiffusionHeterojunctionPhthalocyanineOrganic semiconductorQuantum efficiencyLayer (electronics)OpticsNanotechnologyVoltageCondensed matter physicsPolymerComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have investigated the influence of the poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene)-blend-poly(styrene-sulfonate) (PEDOT:PSS) layer on the short-circuit current density (J(sc)) of single planar heterojunction organic solar cells based on a copper phthalocyanine (CuPc)-buckminsterfullerene (C(60)) active layer. Complete optical and electrical modeling of the cell has been performed taking into account optical interferences and exciton diffusion. Comparison of experimental and simulated external quantum efficiency has allowed us to estimate the exciton diffusion length to be 37 nm for the CuPc and 19 nm for the C(60). The dependence of short-circuit current densities versus the thickness of the PEDOT:PSS layer is analyzed and compared with experimental data. It is found that the variation in short-circuit current densities could be explained by optical interferences.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.163 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations43
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied OpticsSame topicOrganic Electronics and PhotovoltaicsFrench-language works237,207