Changes in Optimal Ternary Additive Loading when Processing Large Area Organic Photovoltaics by Spin‐ versus Blade‐Coating Methods
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As we move toward roll‐to‐roll processing of organic photovoltaics (OPVs), it is important to validate the process and the ink formulations. A poly[[9‐(1‐octylnonyl)‐9Hcarbazole‐2,7‐diyl]‐2,5‐thiophenediyl‐2,1,3‐benzothiadiazole‐4,7 diyl2,5thiophenediyl]:[6,6]‐phenyl C71 butyric acid methyl ester (PCDTBT:PC 71 BM)‐based OPV with an increase in power conversion efficiency (PCE) from 4.6% up to 5.4% by incorporating bis(tri‐hexylsiloxy) silicon phthalocyanine ((3HS)2‐SiPc) NIR absorbing ternary additives on indium tin oxide (ITO)/polyethyleneterapthalate (PET) flexible substrate with active area of 1 cm 2 under simulated AM 1.5G one sun irradiation. Maximum PCE of the ternary OPVs was obtained with 5 wt% of (3HS) 2 ‐SiPc added when processing the active layer by spin coating, whereas the addition of 10 wt% of (3HS) 2 ‐SiPc is required for the maximization of PCE when processing the films by blade coating. The importance of processing conditions when optimizing the concentration of ternary additives in bulk heterojunction (BHJ) OPVs is demonstrated.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it