MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049430708 · doi:10.1109/pvsc.2014.6924994

Optimizing inverted pyramidal grating texture for maximum photoabsorption in thick to thin crystalline silicon photovoltaics

2014· article· en· W2049430708 on OpenAlexafffund
K. Praveen Kumar, Ali Khalatpour, J. Nogami, Nazir P. Kherani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topicsolar cell performance optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceSiliconPhotovoltaicsOptoelectronicsGratingCrystalline siliconOpticsTexture (cosmology)Thin filmPhotovoltaic systemComputer scienceNanotechnologyElectrical engineeringPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We use the wave optical approach to optimize the front surface inverted pyramidal grating texture on 2 to 400 μm thick crystalline silicon in order to derive the maximum photocurrent density from the cell. We identify a “one size fits all” front grating periodicity of 1000 nm for c-Si absorbing layer configured with a back surface reflector that maximizes the absorption of normally incident AM1.5g solar spectrum irrespective of the layer thickness. With the identification of such universal inverted pyramidal grating texture, a common texturing process can be developed for high-efficiency devices on thick to thin c-si. Furthermore, our studies show that the photocurrent decreases by 0.02 mA/cm2with every nanometer increase in the width of the flat region (mesa) between inverted pyramids in the optimum texture. The decrease in photocurrent due to reflection from the mesas can be recovered with the addition of an antireflective coating of optimum thickness of 80 nm and refractive index ~ 2.1.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicsolar cell performance optimizationFrench-language works237,207