MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320660121 · doi:10.1021/cr400299t

The Architecture of Colloidal Quantum Dot Solar Cells: Materials to Devices

2013· review· en· W2320660121 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Reviews · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicQuantum Dots Synthesis And Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryQuantum dotNanotechnologyColloidOptoelectronicsOrganic chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The materials chemistry of Colloidal Quantum Dot (CQDs) suspended in solution and processed into films has provided a foundation onto which useful photovoltaic devices can be built. These active materials offer the benefits of solution processing paired with the flexibility of adjustable bandgaps, tailored to suit a particular need. In parallel with these advances, pursuing device geometries that better leverage the available electronic properties of CQD films has borne fruit in further advancing CQD solar cell performance. For active materials such as CQD films where 1/α, where alpha is the absorption coefficient, is of the same order as the free carrier extraction length, external quantum efficiency (EQE) measurements have proved useful in profiling the effectiveness of each nanometer of device thickness at extracting photogenerated carriers. Because CQD films have the added complications of being made of variable-sized constituent material building blocks as well as being deposited from solution, the nature of charge transport through the films can also be size-dependent and matrix dependent.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.004

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.246 · 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