MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387868867 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3468969/v1

Impact of boron in ultraviolet quantum well-based light emitting diodes

2023· preprint· en· W4387868867 on OpenAlexaff
G. Dhivyasri, M. Manikandan, J. Ajayan, S. Sree, R. Remya, D. Nirmal

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGaN-based semiconductor devices and materials
Canadian institutionsHorizon College and Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptoelectronicsLight-emitting diodeDiodeMaterials scienceAnodeCurrent densityQuantum efficiencyQuantum wellUltravioletBoronPower densityCommon emitterVoltagePower (physics)LaserOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The ByAlxGa1-x–yN system validates promise as a suitable option for fabricating opto-electronic devices like Light-Emitting-Diodes (LEDs) & laser diodes. This study conducts a comparative analysis between two types of LEDs: one with a single quantum well (SQW) composed of AlGaN and another with BAlGaN, containing 1% boron, 22% aluminum, and a 3 nm thickness. These LEDs are designed as AlGaN-based Quantum Well (LED1) and BAlGaN-based Quantum well devices (LED2). Technology Computer-Aided Design (TCAD) Silvaco physical simulator is used to perform simulations and comparisons in terms of both optical and electrical characteristics. The simulations encompass the anode current with respect to anode voltage, luminous power and wall-plug efficiency relative to injection current, and power spectral density concerning wavelength. Remarkably, even with a mere 1% boron content within the quantum well, the LED's performance displays a 2.3% enhancement in power spectral density and a 10% boost in wall-plug efficiency.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 venueResearch SquareSame topicGaN-based semiconductor devices and materialsFrench-language works237,207