Investigation of the degradation mechanisms of a variety of organic photovoltaic devices by combination of imaging techniques: the ISOS-3 inter-laboratory collaboration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The investigation of degradation of seven distinct sets (with a number of individual cells of n $ 12) of state of the art organic photovoltaic devices prepared by leading research laboratories with a combination of imaging methods is reported. All devices have been shipped to and degraded at Risø DTU up to 1830 hours in accordance with established ISOS-3 protocols under defined illuminationconditions. Imaging of device function at different stages of degradation was performed by laser-beam induced current (LBIC) scanning; luminescence imaging, specifically photoluminescence (PLI) and electroluminescence (ELI); as well as by lock-in thermography (LIT). Each of the imaging techniques exhibits its specific advantages with respect to sensing certain degradation features, which will be compared and discussed here in detail. As a consequence, a combination of several imaging techniques yields very conclusive information about the degradation processes controlling device function. The large variety of device architectures in turn enables valuable progress in the proper interpretation of imaging results—hence revealing the benefits of this large scale cooperation in making a step forward in the understanding of organic solar cell aging and its interpretation by state-of-the-art imaging methods.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".