MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2583880254 · doi:10.1038/srep41860

Piezoelectric scattering limited mobility of hybrid organic-inorganic perovskites CH3NH3PbI3

2017· article· en· W2583880254 on OpenAlexafffund
Ying‐Bo Lu, Xianghua Kong, Xiaobin Chen, David G. Cooke, Hong Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPerovskite Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCompute CanadaShandong UniversityNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaMcGill University
KeywordsPiezoelectricityScatteringElectron mobilityPhononMaterials scienceChemical physicsMoleculePhonon scatteringDeformation (meteorology)Condensed matter physicsOptoelectronicsChemistryPhysicsOpticsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Carrier mobility is one of the most important parameters for semiconducting materials and their use in optoelectronic devices. Here we report a systematic first principles analysis of the acoustic phonon scattering mechanism that limits the mobility of CH 3 NH 3 PbI 3 (MAPbI 3 ) perovskites. Due to the unique hybrid organic-inorganic structure, the mechanical, electronic and transport properties are dominated by the same factor, i . e . the weak interatomic bond and the easy rotation of methylammonium (MA) molecules under strain. Both factors make MAPbI 3 soft. Rotation of MA molecule induces a transverse shift between Pb and I atoms, resulting in a very low deformation potential and a strong piezoelectricity in MAPbI 3 . Hence the carrier mobility of pristine MAPbI 3 is limited by the piezoelectric scattering, which is consistent to the form of its temperature dependence. Our calculations suggest that in the pristine limit, a high mobility of about several thousand cm 2 V −1 S −1 is expected for MAPbI 3 .

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)0.001
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.670

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations48
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicPerovskite Materials and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207