MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293084988 · doi:10.1002/aenm.202103961

Extrinsic Doping of Ink‐Based Cu(In,Ga)(S,Se)<sub>2</sub>‐Absorbers for Photovoltaic Applications

2022· article· en· W4293084988 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Energy Materials · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicChalcogenide Semiconductor Thin Films
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMaterials scienceInkwellDopingNanotechnologyDopantDeposition (geology)NanoparticleImpurityVacuum depositionOptoelectronicsThin filmComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The addition of cesium into Cu(In,Ga)(S,Se) 2 ‐short CIGSSe‐absorber layers (fabricated via vacuum deposition methods), has most recently culminated in devices with record power conversion efficiencies up to 23.4%. However, research is increasingly being devoted to the development of ink deposition routes to prepare high‐quality CIGSSe thin films while requiring only a fraction of the processing costs. Such non‐vacuum deposition routes must compete with efficiencies of incumbent technologies to find adoption on a wide scale. At present, the performance of ink‐based devices still fall short of their vacuum counterparts with certified champion cell efficiencies up to 17.7%. The recent performance progression for vacuum‐processed CIGSSe exemplifies the importance of controlling the concentration of extrinsic impurities and serves as an inspiration for gains (e.g., morphological, optoelectronic) for devices with ink‐based absorber layers. This article reviews extrinsic doping concepts for CIGSSe‐type absorbers fabricated by ink‐based deposition routes (both nanoparticle dispersions and molecular inks), provides a performance comparison of select high‐efficiency ink‐based devices, and offers an outlook for future process development in general. It is suggested that the mechanisms by which dopant atoms diffuse, interact, and alter the properties of an ink‐based absorber are fundamentally different than those fabricated from vacuum‐based processes, and require further investigation.

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.

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 score0.196
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.013
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