Experimental evidence of parasitic shunting in silicon nitride rear surface passivated solar cells
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Many solar cells incorporating SiN x films as a rear surface passivation scheme have not reached the same high level of cell performance as solar cells incorporating high‐temperature‐grown silicon dioxide films as a rear surface passivation. In this paper, it is shown by direct comparison of solar cells incorporating the two rear surface passivation schemes, that the performance loss is mainly due to a lower short‐circuit current while the open‐circuit voltage is equally high. With a solar cell test structure that features a separation of the rear metal contacts from the passivating SiN x films, the loss in short‐circuit current can be reduced drastically. Besides a lower short‐ circuit current, dark I–V curves of SiN x rear surface passivated solar cells exhibit distinct shoulders. The results are explained by parasitic shunting of the induced floating junction (FJ) underneath the SiN x films with the rear metal contacts. The floating junction is caused by the high density of fixed positive charges in the SiN x films. Other two‐dimensional effects arising from the injection level dependent SRV of the Si/SiN x interfaces are discussed as well, but, are found to be of minor importance. Pinholes in the SiN x films and optical effects due to a different internal rear surface reflectance can be excluded as a major cause for the performance loss of the SiN x rear surface passivated cells. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it