Nonconventional Symmetric Double-Side Electrochromic Devices Employing a Nafion Conductive Layer to Unlock Superior Durability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, we present a methodology to create an effective novel double-sided symmetric architecture of solid-state electrochromic devices. This principally new nonconventional configuration provides access to novel electrochromic systems that could be applicable for the creation of smart double-side signage, smart boards, nonemissive displays, and other smart interactive devices that change their color upon application of a voltage. The proposed configuration is based on the assembly of two identical electrochromic materials facing each other through an opaque optical separator. As a proof of concept, we use an electrochromic material based on bis(4'-(pyridin-4-yl)-2,2':6',2″-terpyridine) iron complex, covalently immobilized on screen-printed surface-extended ITO support. The symmetric configuration allows for a drastic enhancement of the overall stability of the device due to both attenuation of the counter electrode polarization and minimization of electrolyte decomposition. A nontransparent ion-permeable separator, in turn, allows observing the color change of only one of the electrodes by cutting off the optical contribution of the electrode located behind it. Further functionalization of the electrochromic material with a thin layer of Nafion is a beneficial strategy to significantly boost up long-term durability of the devices. Applying a layer of Nafion to the electrochromic material results in an increase in ionic conductivity within the device and ensures better retention of electrochromic molecules on the surface, thus minimizing device decomposition during long-term electrochemical cycling. An electrochromic device that bears Nafion-functionalized electrodes can operate (i) in the dual-side mode, where both sides demonstrate effective electrochromic performance; or (ii) in a one-side manner, where only one side of the device changes color. Notably, when operating in the one-side mode, the device withstands 70,000 cycles, after which the performance of the device can be resumed by simply turning the device to the other side (via switching the polarity of the electrodes).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".