MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226170932 · doi:10.3389/fchem.2022.857551

The Root Causes of the Limited Electroluminescence Stability of Solution-Coated Versus Vacuum-Deposited Small-Molecule OLEDs: A Mini-Review

2022· article· en· W4226170932 on OpenAlexaff
Fatemeh Samaeifar, Hany Aziz

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Chemistry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOrganic Light-Emitting Diodes Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOLEDElectroluminescenceMaterials scienceFabricationCommercializationCoatingNanotechnologyRoot causeOptoelectronicsLayer (electronics)Reliability engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using solution-coating methods for the fabrication of organic light-emitting devices (OLEDs) offers a tremendous opportunity for enabling low-cost products and new applications. The electroluminescence (EL) stability of solution-coated (SOL) OLEDs, however, is significantly lower than that of vacuum-deposited (VAC) OLEDs, causing their operational lifetimes to be much shorter-an issue that continues to hamper their commercialization. The root causes of the lower EL stability of these devices remain unclear. This article briefly reviews and summarizes some of the work that has been done to-date for elucidating the root cause of the lower EL stability of SOL OLEDs, giving special attention to studies where side-by-side comparisons of SOL and VAC devices of the same materials have been conducted. Such comparisons allow for more-reliable conclusions about the specific effects of the solution-coating process on device stability to be made. The mini-review is intended to introduce the work done to-date on the causes of lower stability in SOL OLEDs and to stimulate further work for the purpose of closing the existing knowledge gap in this area and surmounting this long-standing challenge in the SOL OLED technology.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.553

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.211 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in ChemistrySame topicOrganic Light-Emitting Diodes ResearchFrench-language works237,207