Enhanced Electrical Properties of Crystalline Silicon Solar Cells via Nano-Composite Polyvinyl-Alcohol/Titanium Dioxide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reflection loss and solar cell temperature both have a significant impact on solar cell efficiency and, consequently, on power generation. Herein, the aim is to investigate into the impact of Nanocomposite Titanium Dioxide (TiO2)/Polyvinyl Alcohol (PVA) on polycrystalline silicon solar cells. The solvent casting method is employed to prepare nanocomposite TiO2/PVA for deposition on the front side of the solar cell. The Tauc plot is used to investigate the influence of TiO2 nanoparticle concentration (10-20nm) on the energy bandgap of a nanocomposite. To test the optical properties of the solar cell after depositing the Nanocomposite coating film and to confirm the suspension of TiO2 in PVA and construct a Nanocomposite, an ultraviolet-visible spectrometer and a Fourier transform infrared spectrometer are provided. The results show that increasing the TiO2 in the TiO2/PVA Nanocomposite increases the energy bandgap. The Ultraviolet-Visible spectrometer observes that the Nanocomposite films absorb the Ultraviolet wavelength and transmittance at the visible wavelength. Finally, it found the lowest reflection obtained was 3.9% for 0.2wt% TiO2 in TiO2/PVA nanocomposite and the enhancement of the solar cell efficiency was (+2.3%).
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".