Low‐Bandgap Terpolymers for High‐Gain Photodiodes with High Detectivity and Responsivity from 300 nm to 1600 nm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Three strong electron‐withdrawing monomers and one electron‐donating monomer were chosen by design to impart some desirable properties to the target terpolymers (P1‐P3) for use in the photodiodes, such as strong donor‐acceptor charge transfer, low bandgap, high mobility and good film morphology. Photodiodes with a device structure of ITO/ZnO/active layer/BCP/Al exhibited a significant increase of EQE only under forward bias. In particular, the P2‐based device had the specific detectivity greater than 10 13 Jones from 330 nm to 1060 nm and 10 11 Jones from 300 nm to 1600 nm under 0.5 V and linear dynamic range over 100 dB under 2.0 V. In comparison, after the UV light treatment to the ZnO layer, the P2‐based photodiodes exhibited a high gain in photocurrent under both forward and reverse bias and had specific detectivity above 10 13 Jones at 320–1140 nm, 10 12 Jones at 300–1460 nm and 10 11 Jones at 300–1600 nm under 0.5 V. Our work has firstly demonstrated that high gain and high detectivity in polymer photodetector could be readily achieved under forward bias without the UV light treatment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".