MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010345749 · doi:10.1166/jnn.2020.18494

Design on a Novel Titanium Dioxide Irregularly Distributed Bragg Reflector for Thin Film Silicon Solar Cells

2020· article· en· W3010345749 on OpenAlexaff
Kejie Dai, Xuan Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThin-Film Transistor Technologies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceTitanium dioxideSilicon dioxideDistributed Bragg reflectorSiliconWaferThin filmOptoelectronicsTitaniumOpticsWavelengthNanotechnologyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Titanium dioxide, which leads an excellent optical performance, is proposed to design irregularly distributed Bragg reflector (IDBR) through theoretical simulation as well as experimental verification. Firstly, a primary distributed Bragg reflector (DBR) model with the titanium dioxide serving as low reflection layer in, and amorphous silicon as high reflection layer is analyzed. The titanium dioxide DBR shows much enhanced reflection bandwidth relative to the DBR with silicon dioxide. A further study suggests that a traditional titanium dioxide IDBR demonstrate much enhanced performance versus the silicon dioxide IDBR with similar structure. Besides, the reflection bandwidth of the IDBR, especially in the high wavelength range, is dramatically promoted with respect to the DBR. Finally, a novel gradient IDBR model is developed. The simulation results reveal a higher reflection bandwidth of the titanium dioxide gradient IDBR than the silicon dioxide one. The reflectance of the titanium dioxide gradient IDBR is up to 90% in a range by 300 to 1450 nm. And, the reflection bandwidth of the gradient IDBR is much improved respect to the traditional IDBR. It seems that the titanium dioxide gradient IDBR could be an efficient selection for the thin film silicon solar cells. Finally, the gradient IDBR were fabricated via plasma enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD) on a silicon wafer. A further test demonstrates a reflectance over 95% in the range from 400 to 1400 nm, and verifies the simulation results.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.733
Threshold uncertainty score0.782

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nanoscience and NanotechnologySame topicThin-Film Transistor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207