Influence of the counter electrode on the photovoltaic performance of dye-sensitized solar cells using a disulfide/thiolate redox electrolyte
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Strong scientific interests focus on the investigation of iodine-free redox couples for their application in dye-sensitized solar cells (DSCs). Recently, a disulfide/thiolate-based redox electrolyte has been proposed as a valuable alternative to the conventional I3−/I− system due to its transparent and non-corrosive nature. In the work presented herein, we systematically studied the influence of different counter electrode materials on the photovoltaic performance of DSCs employing this promising organic redox electrolyte. Our investigations focused on understanding the importance of electrocatalytic activity and surface area of the electroactive material on the counter electrode, comparing the conventional platinum to cobalt sulfide (CoS) and poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) (PEDOT). Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy has been used to study in detail the interfacial charge transfer reaction at the counter electrode. By using a high surface area PEDOT-based counter electrode, we finally achieved an unprecedented power conversion efficiency of 7.9% under simulated AM1.5G solar irradiation (100 mW cm−2) which, to the best of our knowledge, represents the highest efficiency that has so far been reported for an organic redox couple.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".