MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2347161485 · doi:10.1002/cnma.201600103

Development of Photovoltaic Devices Based on Near Infrared Quantum Dots and Conjugated Polymers

2016· article· en· W2347161485 on OpenAlexaff
Long Tan, Pandeng Li, Baoquan Sun, Mohamed Chaker, Dongling Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueChemNanoMat · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPerovskite Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolymerMaterials scienceQuantum dotConjugated systemPhotovoltaic systemNanotechnologyNanomaterialsOptoelectronicsHybrid solar cellBand gapPhotovoltaicsPolymer solar cellSolar cellElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract For decades, solution‐processable, light absorbing semiconductor materials of quantum dots (QDs) and conjugated polymers have been extensively studied in third‐generation photovoltaic (PV) devices, targeting both high efficiency and low cost, due to their various advantages. It is promising to fabricate PV devices by further combining near infrared (NIR) QDs and conjugated polymers, which can potentially merge the respective advantages of both polymers and inorganic nanomaterials in mechanical flexibility, specific weight, light absorption and photostability. In this review article, we first present the application of NIR QDs in organic solar cells built upon traditional polymers. Exciton dissociation and charge carrier transport are described, and strategies for improving the performance of these devices are analyzed. Then, the developments of NIR QDs‐polymer hybrid solar cells based on recently developed low‐bandgap polymers are summarized. Finally, future perspectives are discussed.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemNanoMatSame topicPerovskite Materials and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207