MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2344463530 · doi:10.1109/jphotov.2016.2535353

Efficiency Potential of P-Type Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub>/SiN$_{x}$ Passivated PERC Solar Cells With Locally Laser-Doped Rear Contacts

2016· article· en· W2344463530 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Marco Ernst, Daniel Walter, Andreas Fell, Bianca Lim, Klaus Weber

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Photovoltaics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSilicon and Solar Cell Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Gender and HealthAustralian Renewable Energy AgencyUniversity of New South WalesAustralian Government
KeywordsLaserDopingPhysicsMaterials scienceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)OptoelectronicsOpticsChemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technological restrictions on the screen-printed rear-contact feature size on the order of 100 μm are among the limiting factors of the efficiency of p-type passivated emitter rear-contact (PERC) solar cells. Simultaneous contact opening and doping using localized laser processing can overcome these design limitations. We use 3-D numerical device simulations to show that an efficiency gain of 0.3%abs compared with a screen-printed baseline cell, is possible if laser-formed point contacts of 5 μm in size with a contact recombination parameter of 5000 fA·cm-2and a contact resistance of 10-4Ω·cm2are used. We experimentally demonstrate the implementation of simultaneous rear-surface contact opening and doping on large-area 156 × 156 mm2-sized PERC solar cells using ultraviolet (UV) and green laser systems. We achieve efficiencies of up to 19.9% for this process with a 10-nm atomic layer deposited Al2O3/80-nm plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposited SiNxrear-surface dielectric stack.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.192
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of PhotovoltaicsSame topicSilicon and Solar Cell TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207