MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380989285 · doi:10.1051/epjpv/2023011

Determination of individual <i>I</i>(<i>V</i>) characteristics of each sub-cell of a triple junction device

2023· article· en· W4380989285 on OpenAlexaff
Christophe Longeaud, José Alvarez, herinirina Fanevamampiandra, Thomas Bidaud, Gwénaëlle Hamon, Maxime Darnon, Marie‐Estelle Gueunier‐Farret

Bibliographic record

VenueEPJ Photovoltaics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topicsolar cell performance optimization
Canadian institutionsInstitut interdisciplinaire d'innovation technologiqueInterDigital (Canada)Université de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriple junctionStack (abstract data type)Materials scienceConcentratorLaserLeakage (economics)OptoelectronicsEnergy conversion efficiencyPerimeterOpticsSolar cellPhotovoltaic systemElectrical engineeringComputer sciencePhysicsGeometryEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Very high conversion efficiency is reached with triple junction solar devices integrated in concentrator photovoltaic (CPV) modules. However, reduction of the active area for micro-CPV applications increases the perimeter/area ratio, enhancing losses linked to the edges. It is therefore important to characterize the perimeter influence on the final conversion efficiency. For this purpose, I(V) characterization under dark and/or light could be used as a test of the sidewalls influence. We have designed an experiment to perform I(V) curves using the light of three lasers with adjustable powers at 405, 785, and 980 nm, preferentially absorbed by the top, middle or bottom junction of the device, respectively. This experiment was applied to commercial devices made from a stack of GaInP/GaAs/Ge. In parallel we have developed a numerical calculation modeling the device to reproduce the behaviors observed during I(V) experiments. Junction parameters and influence of leakage resistances are deduced from the fit of experimental results with the numerical calculation. The I(V) experiment as well as the numerical calculation are presented in details. It is also underlined that, combining both experiment and calculation, the I(V) characteristic of each junction as if it was isolated can be determined.

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 score0.004

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEPJ PhotovoltaicsSame topicsolar cell performance optimizationFrench-language works237,207