MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064425207 · doi:10.1117/12.2063781

A review of manufacturing metrology for improved reliability of silicon photovoltaic modules

2014· review· en· W2064425207 on OpenAlexaff
Kristopher O. Davis, Joseph Walters, Eric Schneller, Hubert Seigneur, Paul Brooker, Giuseppe Scardera, Marianne P. Rodgers, Nahid Mohajeri, Narendra Shiradkar, Neelkanth G. Dhere, J. Wohlgemuth, Andrew C. Rudack, Winston V. Schoenfeld

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSilicon and Solar Cell Technologies
Canadian institutionsWind Energy Institute of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoltaic systemReliability (semiconductor)Crystalline siliconMetrologySupply chainManufacturing engineeringProcess engineeringReliability engineeringRaw materialComputer scienceSolar cellSystems engineeringMaterials scienceEngineeringElectrical engineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, the use of manufacturing metrology across the supply chain to improve crystalline silicon (c-Si) photovoltaic (PV) module reliability and durability is addressed. Additionally, an overview and summary of a recent extensive literature survey of relevant measurement techniques aimed at reducing or eliminating the probability of field failures is presented. An assessment of potential gaps is also given, wherein the PV community could benefit from new research and demonstration efforts. This review is divided into three primary areas representing different parts of the c-Si PV supply chain: (1) feedstock production, crystallization and wafering; (2) cell manufacturing; and (3) module manufacturing.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicSilicon and Solar Cell TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207