III-V/Si Tandem Cells Utilizing Interdigitated Back Contact Si Cells and Varying Terminal Configurations: Preprint
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solar cells made from bulk crystalline silicon (c-Si) dominate the market, but laboratory efficiencies have stagnated because the current record efficiency of 26.3% is already very close to the theoretical limit of 29.4% for a single-junction c-Si cell. In order to substantially boost the efficiency of Si solar cells we have been developing stacked III-V/Si tandem cells, recently attaining efficiencies above 32% in four-terminal configuration. In this contribution, we use state-of-the-art III-V cells coupled with equivalent circuit simulations to compare four-terminal (4T) to three- and two-terminal (3T, 2T) operation. Equivalent circuit simulations are used to show that tandem cells can be operated just as efficiently using three terminals as with four terminals. However, care must be taken not to overestimate 3T efficiency, as the two circuits used to extract current interact, and a method is described to accurately determine this efficiency. Experimentally, a 4T GaInP/Si tandem cell utilizing an interdigitated back contact cell is shown, exhibiting a 4T efficiency of 31.5% and a 2T efficiency of 28.1%. In 3T configuration, it is used to verify the finding from simulation that 3T efficiency is overestimated when interactions between the two circuits are neglected. Considering these, a 3T efficiency approaching the 4T efficiency is found, showing that 3T operation is efficient, and an outlook on fully integrated high-efficiency 3T and 2T tandem cells is given.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".