Via sidewall insulation for through cell via contacts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past few years, through cell via contacts (TCVC) architecture has been the object of a growing interest to replace standard front side and backside contact on concentrated photovoltaic (CPV) cells. The technology is based on transferring the front side contact to the backside using insulated and metallized vias. This architecture could reduce shading and series resistance, thus increasing device efficiency. However, the processes involved in TCVC fabrication increases the risk of creating short-circuit, reducing significantly the efficiency of the solar cell. Therefore, the electrical insulation must be defect free. In this paper, an insulation validation protocol is proposed in order to thoroughly study the insulation quality. This process has been used to compare two insulation deposition techniques candidates: plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD) and plasma-enhanced atomic layer deposition (PEALD). Results show that the insulation validation protocol presents several strengths such as revealing defects otherwise unobservable even with scanning electron microscopy. PECVD insulation presents several insulation defects whereas PEALD presents almost no defects making it suited for via insulation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".