MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170693863 · doi:10.1002/adfm.201202567

The Photo‐Stability of Polymer Solar Cells: Contact Photo‐Degradation and the Benefits of Interfacial Layers

2012· article· en· W2170693863 on OpenAlexafffund
Graeme Williams, Qi Wang, Hany Aziz

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Functional Materials · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOrganic Electronics and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials sciencePEDOT:PSSDegradation (telecommunications)X-ray photoelectron spectroscopyCathodeOrganic solar cellElectrodeLayer (electronics)Chemical engineeringActive layerInert gasThermal stabilityPolymerLithium (medication)Extraction (chemistry)InertIrradiationOptoelectronicsComposite materialOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The organic/electrode interfaces in organic solar cells are systematically studied for their light, heat, and electrical stability in an inert atmosphere. Various extraction layers are examined for their effect on device stability, including poly(3,4‐ethylenedioxythiophene) poly(styrenesulfonate) (PEDOT:PSS) and MoO 3 for hole extraction layers, as well as LiF, Cs 2 CO 3 , and lithium acetylacetonate (Liacac) for electron extraction layers. The organic/metal interface is shown to be inherently photo‐unstable, resulting in significant losses in device efficiency with irradiation. X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy measurements of the organic/aluminum interface suggest that the photo‐induced changes are chemical in nature. In general, interfacial layers are shown to substantially reduce photo‐degradation of the active layer/electrode interface. In spite of their photo‐stability, several interfacial layers present at the active layer/cathode interface suffer from thermal degradation effects due to temperature increases under exposure to light. Electrical aging effects are proven to be negligible in comparison to other major modes of degradation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations86
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Functional MaterialsSame topicOrganic Electronics and PhotovoltaicsFrench-language works237,207