MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392730517 · doi:10.1002/smll.202307807

The Multiple Roles of Na Ions in Highly Efficient CZTSSe Solar Cells

2024· article· en· W4392730517 on OpenAlexaff
Wentong Yang, Yixiong Ji, Wangxian Chen, Yining Pan, Zifei Chen, Shaoyang Wu, Salvy P. Russo, Yang Xu, Trevor A. Smith, Anthony S. R. Chesman, Paul Mulvaney, Fangyang Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueSmall · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicChalcogenide Semiconductor Thin Films
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
FundersCentre of Excellence in Exciton ScienceNatural Science Foundation of Hunan ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsKesteritePassivationCZTSMaterials scienceDopingIonDissolutionChalcopyriteEnergy conversion efficiencyLayer (electronics)Chemical engineeringOptoelectronicsNanotechnologyMetallurgyChemistryCopper

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sodium (Na) doping is a well‐established technique employed in chalcopyrite and kesterite solar cells. While various improvements can be achieved in crystalline quality, electrical properties, or defect passivation of the absorber materials by incorporating Na, a comprehensive demonstration of the desired Na distribution in CZTSSe is still lacking. Herein, a straightforward Na doping approach by dissolving NaCl into the CZTS precursor solution is proposed. It is demonstrated that a favorable Na ion distribution should comprise a precisely controlled Na + concentration at the front surface and an enhanced distribution within the bottom region of the absorber layer. These findings demonstrated that Na ions play several positive roles within the device, leading to an overall power conversion efficiency of 12.51%.

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 score0.003

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations28
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSmallSame topicChalcogenide Semiconductor Thin FilmsFrench-language works237,207