MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2327611871 · doi:10.1021/ma3009349

Donor–Donor Block Copolymers for Ternary Organic Solar Cells

2012· article· en· W2327611871 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa M. Kozycz, Dong Gao, Jon Hollinger, Dwight S. Seferos

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecules · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOrganic Electronics and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrganic solar cellTernary operationCopolymerMaterials scienceAcceptorOpen-circuit voltagePolymer solar cellPolymerCrystallinityFullereneSolar cellConjugated systemPolymer chemistryChemical engineeringChemistryOptoelectronicsOrganic chemistryComposite materialVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a fully conjugated diblock copolymer, poly(3-thiohexylthiophene)- block -(3-hexylthiophene) (P3THT- b -P3HT), which is composed of two equally proportioned blocks that have distinct electronic structure and is suitable for testing in a donor–donor–acceptor solar cell. Calculations and optoelectronic characterization demonstrate communication between blocks in silico and in solution. In the solid state, powder X-ray diffraction and atomic force microscopy show that the polymer is semicrystalline and has a distinct morphology (relative to a 1:1 physical blend of its constituent homopolymers), both with and without a fullerene-derivative (PC 71 BM) acceptor. When tested in a device configuration (P3THT- b -P3HT:PC 71 BM), the deep HOMO level of the P3THT block increases the open circuit voltage ( V oc ) to a value that is equal to a P3THT:PC 71 BM control device. This shows that the V oc of an equally proportioned ternary organic solar cell can reach the upper limit of the corresponding binary devices. The block copolymer structure is necessary to maintain favorable active layer morphology. The study shows that donor–donor block copolymers are excellent materials for organic solar cells and that a high V oc can be obtained even when the HOMO level of one of the blocks is high.

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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.930

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations43
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacromoleculesSame topicOrganic Electronics and PhotovoltaicsFrench-language works237,207