MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3156392352 · doi:10.24908/iqurcp.9966

Disordered Photonic Crystal Slabs for Thin-Film Photovoltaics

2018· article· en· W3156392352 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chelsea Carlson

Bibliographic record

VenueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference Proceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThin-Film Transistor Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotonic crystalMaterials sciencePhotovoltaicsOptoelectronicsSiliconAmorphous siliconAbsorption (acoustics)PhotonicsAmorphous solidBand gapLayer (electronics)Monocrystalline siliconSolar cellPhotovoltaic systemThin filmCrystal (programming language)OpticsCrystalline siliconNanotechnologyComposite materialChemistryComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photonic crystal nanostructures are the foundation for many optical applications such as nanochip waveguides, optical fibres, and high-Q nanocavities. Recently, researchers have begun to explore the use of photonic crystal slabs to increase the overall absorption of sunlight in thin-film solar photovoltaic (PV) cells. Currently, amorphous silicon (a-Si:H) thin-film technologies can only achieve efficiencies of up to 16% in laboratories and less than 10% in manufactured commercial products. The difficulty in improving these efficiencies arises from the inherent band gap properties of the crystalline silicon layer: the natural photonic bandgap in the near infrared (IR) region of light prohibits almost a third of the entire available solar spectrum from being absorbed. Some of this loss can be salvaged by increasing the thickness of the silicon layer, but this drives the price of the cell up and has very limited potential. However, using photonic crystal nanostructures in the active layer of the cell can decrease the reflection of light at the surface and increase the photon path within the film, enhancing the collection and conversion efficiencies over a broad spectrum. The absorption can be further increased by introducing pseudo-disorder within the structures. The purpose of this study was to explore the physical parameters of this disorder and quantitatively optimize absorption.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.259 · 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.

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference ProceedingsSame topicThin-Film Transistor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207