Interfacial electronic structure of a hybrid organic-inorganic optical upconverter device: The role of interface states
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organic-inorganic hybrid heterojunctions are critical for the integration of organic electronics with traditional Si and III-V semiconductor microelectronics. The amorphous nature of organic semiconductors eliminates the stringent lattice-matching requirements in semiconductor monolithic growth. However, as of yet it is unclear what driving forces dictate the energy-level alignment at hybrid organic-inorganic heterojunctions. Using photoelectron spectroscopy we investigate the energy-level alignment at the hybrid organic-inorganic heterojunction formed between S-passivated InP(100) and several commonly used hole injection/transport molecules, namely, copper phthalocyanine (CuPc), N,N′-diphenyl-N,N′-bis-(1-naphthyl)-1-1′-biphenyl-4,4′-diamine (α-NPD), and fullerene (C60). The energy-level alignment at the hybrid organic-inorganic heterojunction is found to be consistent with traditional interface dipole theory, originally developed to describe Schottky contacts. Contrary to conventional wisdom, hole injection from S-passivated InP(100) into an organic semiconductor is found to originate from interface states at or near the Fermi level, rather than from the valance band maximum of the semiconductor. As a result the barrier height for hole injection is defined by the offset between the surface Fermi level of the S-passivated InP(100) and the highest occupied molecular orbital of the organic. This finding sheds new light on the unusual trend in device performance reported in literature for such hybrid organic-inorganic heterojunction devices.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".