MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3029280532 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2020-0081

Low-bandgap push–pull molecules in polymer matrices for use in thin-film organic photovoltaic devices

2020· article· en· W3029280532 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Pierre-Louis M. Brunner, Daniel Beaudoin, Alice Heskia, Thierry Maris, Marc‐André Dubois, James D. Wuest

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOrganic Electronics and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryConjugated systemPolymerBand gapMoleculeCarbazoleThin filmSmall moleculePhotovoltaic systemPhotochemistryOrganic solar cellPolymer solar cellEnergy conversion efficiencyElectron acceptorButyric acidChemical engineeringPolymer chemistryOrganic chemistryOptoelectronicsNanotechnologyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conjugated polymers are widely used in thin-film organic photovoltaic devices to absorb light and serve as electron donors or acceptors. Small molecular analogues are attractive substitutes because they have fully defined structures, can be purified rigorously, and are typically more soluble and volatile. However, producing active films composed primarily of small molecules remains challenging. We have devised bulk heterojunction solar cells in which poly(3-hexylthiophene-2,5-diyl) and poly[[9-(1-octylnonyl)-9H-carbazole-2,7-diyl]-2,5-thiophenediyl-2,1,3-benzothiadiazole-4,7-diyl-2,5-thiophenediyl] are used as matrices to prepare films containing low-bandgap push–pull molecules as electron donors and (6,6)-phenyl-C61-butyric acid methyl ester or (6,6)-phenyl-C71-butyric acid methyl ester as electron acceptors. Compared with reference devices devoid of push–pull molecular additives, increases in power conversion efficiencies up to 30.4% were measured.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicOrganic Electronics and PhotovoltaicsFrench-language works237,207