MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optical Response and Photovoltaic Performance of Organic Solar Cells Based on DH6T:Alq3 Active Layer

2016· article· en· W2292734196 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fahmi Fariq Muhammad, Abdulkader Jaleel Muhammad, Khaulah Sulaiman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Technology Innovations in Renewable Energy · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOrganic Light-Emitting Diodes Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Malaya
KeywordsPhotovoltaic systemActive layerMaterials scienceAluminiumLayer (electronics)Absorption (acoustics)Molar concentrationOrganic solar cellOptoelectronicsCastingChemical engineeringNanotechnologyChemistryComposite materialPolymerOrganic chemistryElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research work reports on the optical and photovoltaic performance of dihexyl-sexithiophene (DH6T) doped with various molar percentages of tris-8-hydroxyquinolinate aluminium (Alq3) dissolved in chloroform/hexane co-solvent. Films of DH6T(1-x)Alq3(x) composite have been produced by casting technique aiming at investigating their absorption edge energies (Eabs) and hence identifying the optimum content of Alq3. It was found that by introducing a controlled amount of Alq3, the value of Eabs can be tuned from 2.69 eV to 1.76 eV. An empirical equation was derived to fit the obtained experimental data, by which an optimum Eabs at molar concentration of (x ≈ 25%) was predicted. Finally, organic solar cells based on the optimum active layer content were fabricated and tested. Comparably, it was observed that the photovoltaic performance of the DH6T:Alq3 based devices is much better than that achieved for the DH6T:PCBM based ones. Efficiency and fill factor for the devices based on DH6T(0.75)Alq3(0.25) active layer were found to be 0.22% and 26.5%, respectively, while those for DH6T:PCBM based devices were about 0.01% and 24%, respectively.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Technology Innovations in Renewable EnergySame topicOrganic Light-Emitting Diodes ResearchFrench-language works237,207