MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803856010 · doi:10.1002/wene.302

Recent progress in flexible dye solar cells

2018· article· en· W2803856010 on OpenAlexafffund
Kati Miettunen, Jaana Vapaavuori, Aapo Poskela, Armi Tiihonen, Peter D. Lund

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Energy and Environment · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicTiO2 Photocatalysis and Solar Cells
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersKoneen SäätiöBanting Research Foundation
KeywordsCommercializationPhotovoltaicsPhotovoltaic systemOrganic solar cellNanotechnologySolar cellMaterials scienceProcess engineeringEngineeringBusinessElectrical engineeringOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flexible dye‐sensitized solar cells are an intriguing photovoltaic technology, especially from the point of view of integration of photovoltaics into everyday objects, owing to these solar cells conforming easily to different nonplanar geometries and low‐intensity lighting conditions. However, the commercialization of these devices has not yet fully taken off due to few persisting gaps in the optimization of employed materials and processes. Herein, we focus on the recent progress on flexible dye sensitized solar cells, and how obstacles to larger‐scale production have been removed. There have been major advancements in diverse roll‐to‐roll compatible preparation methods of various cell layers, as well as in understanding the corrosion of metal electrodes in liquid electrolyte. We also pinpoint the remaining challenges for full commercialization of these technologies, one of which is reaching long‐term stability in which case sealing of the flexible device plays a major role. Furthermore, environmental considerations such as the life cycle assessment and the use of more sustainable materials in solar cell preparation are discussed. This article is categorized under: Energy Research & Innovation > Science and Materials Photovoltaics > Science and Materials

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations22
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Energy and EnvironmentSame topicTiO2 Photocatalysis and Solar CellsFrench-language works237,207