MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3213919387 · doi:10.1002/pssb.202100459

Measuring Energy Gaps of Organic Semiconductors by Electron Energy Loss Spectroscopies

2021· article· en· W3213919387 on OpenAlexaff
Nan Chen, Dengke Wang, Juntao Hu, Lifan Guan, Zheng‐Hong Lu

Bibliographic record

Venuephysica status solidi (b) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOrganic Electronics and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsX-ray photoelectron spectroscopySemiconductorElectron energy loss spectroscopyBand gapMaterials scienceAtomic physicsSpectroscopyElectronOptoelectronicsPhysicsNuclear magnetic resonanceNanotechnologyTransmission electron microscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Herein is explored the use of electron energy loss due to π–π* transition to measure energy gaps of organic semiconductors. Sources of kinetic electrons studied include an external electron gun (reflection electron energy loss spectroscopy (REELS)) and an internal core shell excitation by X‐rays (i.e., X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS)). To obtain the bandgap accurately, a data analysis method is proposed to extract the optical bandgap from the π–π* inelastic electron energy loss spectra. This method uses a Gaussian function to fit experimental data yielding a peak width w and position E 0 . The energy gap of an organic semiconductor, i.e., the onset of the π–π* transition peak, can then be calculated by . Through examination of 11 organic semiconductors, it is found that the bandgaps measured by REELS agree well with optical bandgaps. The bandgaps measured by XPS, however, do not always agree with optical gaps. This indicates that the XPS π–π* inelastic peak in some material systems may convolute with other core shell processes such as shake‐up. In addition, it is shown that all key energy structures of an organic semiconductor can be measured concurrently by REELS and ultraviolet photoemission spectroscopy.

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 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuephysica status solidi (b)Same topicOrganic Electronics and PhotovoltaicsFrench-language works237,207