MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282962512 · doi:10.1021/acsenergylett.2c01094

Visualizing Macroscopic Inhomogeneities in Perovskite Solar Cells

2022· article· en· W4282962512 on OpenAlexaff
Akash Dasgupta, Suhas Mahesh, Pietro Caprioglio, Yen‐Hung Lin, Karl‐Augustin Zaininger, Robert D. J. Oliver, Philippe Holzhey, Suer Zhou, M. McCarthy, Joel A. Smith, Maximilian Frenzel, M. Greyson Christoforo, James M. Ball, Bernard Wenger, Henry J. Snaith

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Energy Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPerovskite Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilEuropean CommissionRhodes ScholarshipsUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsPerovskite (structure)Stack (abstract data type)MillimeterMaterials scienceRange (aeronautics)PhotoluminescenceScale (ratio)NanotechnologyOptoelectronicsComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceOpticsPhysicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the incredible progress made, the highest efficiency perovskite solar cells are still restricted to small areas (<1 cm 2 ). In large part, this stems from a poor understanding of the widespread spatial heterogeneity in devices. Conventional techniques to assess heterogeneities can be time consuming, operate only at microscopic length scales, and demand specialized equipment. We overcome these limitations by using luminescence imaging to reveal large, millimeter-scale heterogeneities in the inferred electronic properties. We determine spatially resolved maps of “charge collection quality”, measured using the ratio of photoluminescence intensity at open and short circuit. We apply these methods to quantify the inhomogeneities introduced by a wide range of transport layers, thereby ranking them by suitability for upscaling. We reveal that top-contacting transport layers are the dominant source of heterogeneity in the multilayer material stack. We suggest that this methodology can be used to accelerate the development of highly efficient, large-area modules, especially through high-throughput experimentation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations45
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Energy LettersSame topicPerovskite Materials and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207