MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2322701140 · doi:10.1021/jp309800f

Designing Polymers for Photovoltaic Applications Using ab Initio Calculations

2013· article· en· W2322701140 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicolas Bérubé, Vincent Gosselin, Josiane Gaudreau, Michel Côté

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOrganic Electronics and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCompute Canada
KeywordsEnergy conversion efficiencyPhotovoltaic systemPolymerBand gapMaterials scienceAb initioPower (physics)Open-circuit voltageMaximum power principleDensity functional theoryVoltageRangingComputational physicsOptoelectronicsComputer scienceComputational chemistryThermodynamicsElectrical engineeringChemistryPhysicsTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article evaluates the efficiency of density functional theory calculations when used in conjunction with Scharber’s model to predict the power conversion efficiency of organic solar cells. Thirty polymers were investigated, and their calculated electronic properties were assessed against their reported experimental values. The energy level calculations have a relatively small standard deviation of about 0.2 eV after a correction for a systematic overestimation. The optical band gap and the open-circuit voltage are obtained within an accuracy of 0.09 eV and 0.10 V, respectively. Also, the model provides an indication of the maximum value for the short-circuit current and an interesting guiding tool to identify promising suitable polymers to reach high power conversion efficiencies. After validating the present numerical approach against known devices, new polymers that could reach a power conversion efficiency ranging from 8 to 11% are presented.

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 score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations73
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry CSame topicOrganic Electronics and PhotovoltaicsFrench-language works237,207