Quantitative Analysis of Charge Distribution in Bi-Emissive layer White Organic Light-Emitting Diodes with Two Fluorescent Dopants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work seeks to establish a quantitative method which can estimate the holes and electrons ratio in the emission zones. We fabricated multilayered white organic light-emitting diodes (WOLEDs) with the device structure of ITO/NPB(80 nm)/MADN:BUBD-1(7%)(20 nm)/MADN:DCJTB(0.3%)(20 nm)/TPBi(X nm)/LiF(2 nm)/Al as a case study on the charge recombination distribution in the emissive layer. The result shows a trend in the charge recombination ratio depending on the electron transport layer thickness. We obtained an empirical relationship between electron transport layer thicknesses and emission ratio in EML. In addition, the electroluminescent spectra were analyzed by fitting a Gaussian distribution for the two emissive layers to calculate the intensity ratio of the energy transitions. The arrival time of hole and electrons from each electrode was determined using the thickness and mobility of TPBi as electron transport layer. From these initial results, we derived an empirical mechanism to meet with a linear relationship that can allow us to design custom- made WOLEDs.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".